liz3564 wrote:I don't know what kind of "research" you think I have done, Scratch. If you are accusing me of looking at IP addresses and giving that type of information to Pahoran or anyone else, I flat out deny it.
Go ahead and deny it. I've got the incontrovertible proof in my PM box.
Did Pahoran tell me that he thought that Chino Blanco was Scratch? Yes, he did.
Did I suggest that Dan unfriend Jason Echols, who was on Dan's Facebook friend list? Yes, I did. (by the way, Dan does not know Jason, and has no idea why that person was on his friends list to begin with.)
Pahoran had already told Dan that he thought Jason was Scratch. All I did was notice that Jason Echols' name was on Dan's Friends list, and suggested that he remove Jason as a friend as a security precaution.
I did read on Jason's Facebook page (which is public) that he spent time in Taiwan. The comment I made to Scratch was an obscure swipe. It was a payback for his prior pulling of crap on me when he has tried to get me ousted as a Moderator previously.
"Payback"? Your idea of appropriate "payback" is to publicly use private information against someone?
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
liz3564 wrote:I did read on Jason's Facebook page (which is public) that he spent time in Taiwan. The comment I made to Scratch was an obscure swipe. It was a payback for his prior pulling of crap on me when he has tried to get me ousted as a Moderator previously.
It was an obscure enough swipe that if Scratch was NOT Jason Echols, Scratch would not know what the hell I was talking about, and it would be no harm no foul. If Scratch WAS Jason, then it would allow him to know that I suspected who he was, and he better simply leave me alone.
Dude, that's f#$#@d up...
Last edited by Guest on Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"your reasoning that children should be experimented upon to justify a political agenda..is tantamount to the Nazi justification for experimenting on human beings."-SUBgenius on gay parents "I've stated over and over again on this forum and fully accept that I'm a bigot..." - ldsfaqs
liz3564 wrote:I don't know what kind of "research" you think I have done, Scratch. If you are accusing me of looking at IP addresses and giving that type of information to Pahoran or anyone else, I flat out deny it.
Did Pahoran tell me that he thought that Chino Blanco was Scratch? Yes, he did.
Did I suggest that Dan unfriend Jason Echols, who was on Dan's Facebook friend list? Yes, I did. (by the way, Dan does not know Jason, and has no idea why that person was on his friends list to begin with.)
Pahoran had already told Dan that he thought Jason was Scratch. All I did was notice that Jason Echols' name was on Dan's Friends list, and suggested that he remove Jason as a friend as a security precaution.
I did read on Jason's Facebook page (which is public) that he spent time in Taiwan. The comment I made to Scratch was an obscure swipe. It was a payback for his prior pulling of crap on me when he has tried to get me ousted as a Moderator previously.
It was an obscure enough swipe that if Scratch was NOT Jason Echols, Scratch would not know what the hell I was talking about, and it would be no harm no foul. If Scratch WAS Jason, then it would allow him to know that I suspected who he was, and he better simply leave me alone.
I find the idea of a moderator dialoguing with someone like Pahoran about the possible identity of an MDB poster - as Liz now says has - to be extremely unsettling.
And is she outing Chino as Jason Echols? It would appear that she is. Why do that?
I really do think that moderators need to avoid the appearance of evil in order to retain the trust of other posters. I am not clear whether Liz has succeeded in doing that.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Proof in your PM box? That I would like to see. You don't even care to correspond with me privately, so that's a laugh.
I didn't expose anything, Scratch. That comment was meant as a private swipe. Who would know what the hell I was talking about unless it was brought to their attention? (The Taiiwan comment)
Look...you have been trying to get me to step down as Moderator for years now. That has been your goal.
lulu wrote:I'd even be willing to bet DCP is a public figure, so he'd have to show reckless disregard for the truth.
Good point. Among other things, including his name dropping, public disclosures of all his travels and the "important things" he does, having his own page on Wikipedia would probably qualify him as a public figure for the purposes of a defense against libel.
Yes, but if Sockpuppet is a lawyer as he claims, he can tell you that the "public figure" defense doesn't automagically vitiate any and all libel claims. And proving that Scratch shows reckless disregard for the truth, not to mention actual malice, would be trivially easy.
Pahoran wrote:And proving that Scratch shows reckless disregard for the truth, not to mention actual malice, would be trivially easy.
Regards, Pahoran
Please prove it for us right here...I haven't really seen anything like what you describe but would be happy to review anything I have missed. Thanks in advance.
"your reasoning that children should be experimented upon to justify a political agenda..is tantamount to the Nazi justification for experimenting on human beings."-SUBgenius on gay parents "I've stated over and over again on this forum and fully accept that I'm a bigot..." - ldsfaqs
Chap wrote:I read this thread as saying that they got the wrong guy - Chino is not Scratch. Indeed DCP seems to have withdrawn his own 'outing' by deleting the relevant name from his blog.
And the ensuing sigh of relief from this forum was enough to cause a hurricane in the Atlantic Ocean.
Chap wrote:The point being claimed in recent posts (as I understand them) is that at least one mod in this board thought that Chino was Scratch, and passed on that information to interested parties, who were then misled into acting on it.
liz3564 wrote:I don't know what kind of "research" you think I have done, Scratch. If you are accusing me of looking at IP addresses and giving that type of information to Pahoran or anyone else, I flat out deny it.
Go ahead and deny it. I've got the incontrovertible proof in my PM box.
And yet I don't, and I'm supposed to be the person she gave it to.
Is it cold-blooded malice that motivates you to make false accusations like that, or rage that you can no longer rely upon anonymity to protect your relentless hate campaign? Inquiring minds want to know!
Mister Scratch wrote:
Did Pahoran tell me that he thought that Chino Blanco was Scratch? Yes, he did.
Did I suggest that Dan unfriend Jason Echols, who was on Dan's Facebook friend list? Yes, I did. (by the way, Dan does not know Jason, and has no idea why that person was on his friends list to begin with.)
Pahoran had already told Dan that he thought Jason was Scratch. All I did was notice that Jason Echols' name was on Dan's Friends list, and suggested that he remove Jason as a friend as a security precaution.
I did read on Jason's Facebook page (which is public) that he spent time in Taiwan. The comment I made to Scratch was an obscure swipe. It was a payback for his prior pulling of crap on me when he has tried to get me ousted as a Moderator previously.
"Payback"? Your idea of appropriate "payback" is to publicly use private information against someone?
So you admit that she was using your private information?
liz3564 wrote:Proof in your PM box? That I would like to see. You don't even care to correspond with me privately, so that's a laugh.
I didn't expose anything, Scratch. That comment was meant as a private swipe. Who would know what the hell I was talking about unless it was brought to their attention? (The Taiiwan comment)
Look...you have been trying to get me to step down as Moderator for years now. That has been your goal.
Well, guess what? You won.
Go to hell.
It's for the best.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Pahoran wrote:And proving that Scratch shows reckless disregard for the truth, not to mention actual malice, would be trivially easy.
Regards, Pahoran
Please prove it for us right here...I haven't really seen anything like what you describe but would be happy to review anything I have missed. Thanks in advance.
Sure.
Just read any Scratch-started thread about Dan in this forum. His malice is plain for all to see.