posted June 18, 2006 04:55 PM              

lots of LOve and Light to YOU, Fayte..

posted June 18, 2006 05:02 PM              

So take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of happiness you'll never get back.

Don't be afraid that your life will end, be afraid that it will never begin.

~anonymous~

posted June 18, 2006 05:05 PM            

quote:

---

what you guys were doing is present day..

---

No that's not true.

April 28th is the last time we had a discussion in our evil Suggestion Box category, and it wasn't talking about anyone HERE at all. It was asking if we should boot the mystery people. It got 11 votes, which probably accounts for less than half the people there. Here's how that thread ended:

Lia
Organic Orgasm Inducer
Joined: 12 Dec 2005
Posts: 126
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:53 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't feel that I have to know everyone in order to feel comfortable to post. Guess there are some main criterias that seem important~
Are they open-minded and good-hearted?
Cool then by me.

Although, loud blabber-mouths probably wouldn't be a good idea.

I think maybe this feels weird to most of us to be so exclusive?
If you really think of it, we're probably the outsider-unconformist types that were most often excluded.
Ironic aint it?

Guess that's why so far I've shyed away from the polls....sparks a rebellion in me, gotta admit. Just doesn't feel right to me.

I've never watched "Survivor" and damnit, I refuse to.

But then the other part of me totally rationalizes it as understandable. And really likes it here the way it is.
Such a peaceful, easssy feeling.
________________________________________________

posted June 18, 2006 05:08 PM              

and like private email, they discussed their issues with a freedom we all like to think we enjoy in private discussions....in a room, email, any place private. people reading there, then reading here, would receive a tainted view of members here, where those members didn't have the opportunity or benenfit of knowing what was being said about them.

private email is that...what you say there remains private, and isn't available for others to share. people should have every right to that privacy and freedom. a closed forum is the same thing. because someone can hack in and invade that privacy is like having your phone bugged, and then exposed.

to repeat the contents of a hacked private means of communication in a public place is lightyears different than repeating the contents of a public message board.

posted June 18, 2006 05:18 PM            

"it would be much more fun for me personally to push the boundaries and to be the subject of a Moderator's debate, than it would to be a Moderator debating how a person/situation should be handled. I'd always advocate leaving things alone as it were, so me as a Moderator would be kinda moot." http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/001576-5.html

posted June 18, 2006 05:40 PM            

Going out of your way to prove that people have said nice things about him just makes you look like a vengeful little child, and does nothing whatsoever to prove whatever point you supposedly have. He said some awful things, no one denies it, but it's fairly obvious here, at least to me, that those have little to nothing to do with the real reason you dislike him, which everyone who reads threads in GU knows goes back far before any of this nonsense.

Show of hands for who likes Magus? Trying to seperate him from his friends, huh? Pathetic. But whatever. I like Magus - I've said it here, I've said it on KS, and I'll say it again wherever. I know that I've said some terrible things in my life, but my friends would be worthless if they deserted me for them.

For goodness sake, Petron. You are exactly who I was talking about when I said that people with old vendettas are having a field day with this.

quote:

---

Randall's moderator forum was private. not open to just anyone who found the site, or who was invited in by another member for any of lots of different reasons.

---

Randall just said he spends a great deal of time and money keeping LL at the top of the search-engines. KS was at the bottom of said search engines, Salome. Your analogy strikes me as thin.

posted June 18, 2006 05:42 PM            

I see what you're saying, but the way things played out everything has gotten a bit distorted.

If Pid had simply posted the link to our place and people came streaming in the site would have likely stayed up. Some people who were already there may have decided to leave at that point, but the majority of what was on that site wasn't talk about people here.

I never took the precaution of making it super private, because of my feelings about privacy. Everyone there who cared about privacy considered it private none-the-less. They were naive. I was warned by Fayte that we were Google-able, and I'm not saavy enough to know what to do about that, nor did I personally care too much because I don't feel I've got anything to hide.

What I'm trying to point out is that it was private to those who were there regardless of the fact that it wasn't actually secure.

posted June 18, 2006 05:43 PM              

MM, you said, "DayDreamer- Sure, leave out the fact that I also have said many more a nice things too yeah, and wouldnt have ever said the half of the nasty ones had you not done what you had done. If your so mature then atleast be honest with your self and admit you asked for what I said , maybe even and then some."
I wont get personal...I was glad that the truth got out at the time...however deceptive I may have been to you...I didnt think it was as bad as some of your plans and what you did...still I admit that was low of me. I didnt ask for all the things you said to me, but I knew they were bound to happen and took that risk...so I dont blame you for what you said to me. But what you said about Tink behind her back was uncalled for!

"Atleast Ive got the decency too not deny that Im far from being well aged and matured when put next too wiser."
I dont know you sorta talk like everyone's below you and that you're tending to your masses sometimes.

posted June 18, 2006 05:47 PM            

quote:

---

That sort of thing is/was allowed at KS, but not here.

---

It's allowed here every day. You need look no further than Jwhop for evidence of that...

..or the first page of this thread:

posted June 18, 2006 05:49 PM            

quote:

---

Some of you seem to have a disdain for Lindaland (except for its use as a means of recruitment)

---

Again: we love LL!! And we thank you for all your efforts in keeping it on the net

posted June 18, 2006 05:53 PM            

"I'm still working on it, but I'm starting to let people check it out anyway. It is open to anyone, but I'm not going to advertise it at LL. It's not meant to compete, just to be another place where our friends can get together, especially when things get crazy at LL. If you have Sue's email, please let her know as well."

posted June 18, 2006 06:01 PM            

quote:

---

Very much unlike the public venue at KS.

---

As AG has said, all of us tech-unsavvy people thought that it was more or less private. We were aware of it's limitations, to some degree, though - this in itself ought to lend some credence to our claims that we had nothing to hide.

Possibly I'm just dense, but I think this thread started out dealing with the issue of people being talked about behind their backs. In the end, what does privacy have to do with that?

Is it always wrong? Obviously not, as forum moderators do it all over the Internet. We did it with the same purposes in mind, when we did it at all - and, as your own moderator forum has proven, there is no true privacy to be found anywhere on the net.

What is more important: intent or reality?

quote:

---

I've seen the string which offended Pid, and yes, I am a bit appalled. Not that it's obscene or vile. It's just that hearing people say who should and should not be included in the private party sort of left a sick feeling in my stomach.

---

It was never meant to offend, and it was necessary, or no one would ever be invited! I was invited in the same way, after people debated me, as was most everyone else.

Maybe it was wrong to have a "private party" in the first place, but, as much as I hate to say it, that was necessary, too. Lindaland, after all, is an open forum, for better or worse. Trolls and stalkers are a reality here, even if they are in the tiny minority.

quote:

---

Some of you seem to have a disdain for Lindaland (except for its use as a means of recruitment), so I guess some of you truly are kindred spirits.

---

Who? I know of no one there who had any sort of disdain for this place, and we certainly weren't using your site as a means of recruitment, as if KS was some rival faction. I love LindaLand - I've visited it longer than any forum on the net. I never stopped visiting in all the time I knew of KS.

I'll echo 'Zala here - thank you for your efforts, Randall.

posted June 18, 2006 06:08 PM              

on a public message board, seeing everyone discuss them and their personalities amongst themselves?

but why should i care, i suppose i should just be out taking pictures....

being the bored, busybody woman that i am....

if one is excluded from Kindred Spirits...now it appears that that person should be excluded from the real LL as well, whose opinion goes against the 'Kindred Spirit' and constitutes nothing more than 'busybody boredom.'

and what would be the definition of the nature of the comments from Kindred Spirits posted here? intelligent, highminded and imperative?

posted June 18, 2006 06:16 PM            

For someone who appears to find this conversation so unpleasant, you spend an inordinate amount of time here. I'm assuming it's because you're bored and interested in other's affairs.

posted June 18, 2006 06:17 PM            

quote:

---

I'll echo 'Zala here - thank you for your efforts, Randall.

---

Yes indeed!

On a further note, those "efforts" included paying a nice fee to keep the Moderator forum PRIVATE so the very darn issue running amok here was
derailed. Isn`t the difference of private vs.public self evident?

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted June 18, 2006 06:17 PM            

quote:

---

if privacy to discuss LL people uncensored was of such paramount importance at KS

---

That wasn't the reason people wanted privacy as far as I know. The reason for privacy was to ensure that personal information didn't get out, and also so that we wouldn't get stalked by trolls from LL.

quote:

---

so why all the desperate effort here to make it seem as though there was nothing about its discovery to be dismayed about?

---

I wouldn't call it desperate. The way I look at it I could run & hide in shame for something I don't need to be ashamed of, I could blow you all off and leave all speculation unanswered, or I can sit here and be respectful and answer what comes up about K.S. I'm taking my own weekend time with the latter, because I have enough integrity to do so.

quote:

---

the defending arguments contradict each other

---

posted June 18, 2006 06:19 PM              

quote:

---

Randall just said he spends a great deal of time and money keeping LL at the top of the search-engines. KS was at the bottom of said search engines, Salome. Your analogy strikes me as thin.

---

please.....

LL is a public message board as was KS, regardless of its place on google...and wherever a public message board happens to reside in a search engine's venue has nothing whatsoever to do with who gets invited in.

when a person signs up at the real LL as a member and submits his or her email address, is he submitting its contents, or even the address itself, to public internet viewing, just because this public site remains at the top of search engines? i don't think so; in fact, Randall takes extra measures here to keep members' email and identities private.

in the same way, neither is a private forum here in any way opening itself to public viewing either, just because it exists on this site.

posted June 18, 2006 06:19 PM            

quote:

---

Isn`t the difference of private vs.public self evident?

---

Maybe you ought to ask Prox that? After all, she saw it, not I, and apparently it wasn't as pleasant as it could have been. But who knows.

posted June 18, 2006 06:21 PM            

quote:

---

I wouldn't call it desperate. The way I look at it I could run & hide in shame for something I don't need to be ashamed of, I could blow you all off and leave all speculation unanswered, or I can sit here and be respectful and answer what comes up about K.S. I'm taking my own weekend time with the latter, because I have enough integrity to do so.

---

Thanks, AG, for putting this better than I could. God knows I've tried, but you hit the nail on the head.

posted June 18, 2006 06:25 PM              

quote:

---

I refer to you as that, Salome, mostly because you had nothing to do with KS, were almost certainly never discussed there, and seem to delight in riding in on a high horse and passing judgement on matters that you are totally ignorant of.
For someone who appears to find this conversation so unpleasant, you spend an inordinate amount of time here. I'm assuming it's because you're bored and interested in other's affairs.

---

did i say anything about this being unpleasant?

and you're spending a much more inordinate amount of time in this thread for what purpose? because you cared about a website you posted on?

posted June 18, 2006 06:27 PM              

quote:

---

Fayte, please refrain from name-calling. That sort of thing is/was allowed at KS, but not here.

---

Randall, Sorry, in all due respect, that is not exactly true. You know that you allow Jwhop here at GU to call everyone names and he does it consistently. He is consistently telling me that I am a liar. That is name calling, Randall. And it is in fact allowed at LL. You know that in the past I discussed that with you on the thread at GU.

You stated at that time that it was your policy due to freedom of speech. I reminded you that even in a democratic society freedom of speech does not include verbal abuse and that what Jwhop does to people is verbal abuse. I stated that no one should have to be subjected to that just for giving a differing opinion. In fact, Jwhop was canned from CE for doing that there after repeated warnings and chances from Greg.

I'm not campaigning to have Jwhop kicked out of LL. I can deal with his stuff or I wouldn't post at GU, but I have heard a lot of folks here at LL say they do not post at GU because of all the name calling and personal attacks by Jwhop.

People here speak as they do to Lotus because she starts the attacks first. You can go back and read all the threads and easily see that. Lotus is also one to call others liars who disagree with her. Beyond that she attacks people's characters and their relationship with God.

Sorry, but even if I get ousted from LL for saying this it is true. Name calling is allowed at LL on the premise of free speech.