Since I first made this blog entry I have been alerted by Pickled Tink that 'several folk' have raised with her the fact that they did not give permission for me to quote their posts from the forum in this blog. For that I apologise. I also accept that I was in violation of rule 8 of the forum. (The fact that CanadianBill was in violation of rule 10 when he posted his thread about me seems not to have been a problem.)
I checked back to this blog entry today (November 22nd 2010) only to find that some of the posts in this (closed) thread have been changed. This is what I have found:
Post #437 is now #430
I checked back to this blog entry today (November 22nd 2010) only to find that some of the posts in this (closed) thread have been changed. This is what I have found:
Post #437 is now #430
Post #1092 is now #1083
Post #1437 is now #1463
Post #955 is now post #946
Post #1024 is now post #1015
Post #1038 is now post #1029
When I first posted the links, the post numbers were correct. Since then, the numbers of the posts I quoted have changed. That can happen when posts are deleted and the remaining posts change to lower numbers. But this was a closed thread. How could it have happened here? Was the thread opened in order to delete posts? Did someone want to hide something? Was someone simply being petty?
I am amending my links here accordingly.
On November 10th 2010 Pickled Tink posted that a lot of things had occurred and a lot of folk had been hurt across the forum, the actions of one individual had had us all at each others throats, mistrusting each other, and believing all sorts of rumours about each other.
Why is a retraction of these rumours so important?
Is it to assuage pride?
Is it to nurse bruised egos?
Is it as balm for hurt feelings?
No, it is not. Above all else, it is to disempower the cyber-stalker bully who left many, many victims in his wake.
We have a choice; to remain victims and try to brush over the effects of his malicious communications or we can make a stand and disempower him completely.
It must be the latter. Anything else sends out an ambiguous message to this kind of criminal. Any degree of success encourages him. He has been prolific and persistent.
We have a choice; to remain victims and try to brush over the effects of his malicious communications or we can make a stand and disempower him completely.
It must be the latter. Anything else sends out an ambiguous message to this kind of criminal. Any degree of success encourages him. He has been prolific and persistent.
This man is a recidivist offender.
He will, after winning your trust, ask if you have heard a rumour about something. If you show any degree of interest, he can give you the email address of someone else who will be happy to confirm the rumour. This 'other person' will, of course, be another of his identities.
He will be male, female, gay, straight; even a mother mourning the loss of a child. But in order to win your trust initially, he will always be an ardent fan of Susan Boyle.
He will offer you tidbits of insider information, about music matters in particular. Most will check out, which will make you feel 'special'.
To all intents and purposes this man will be your friend. But he will turn on you when the moment suits him and when he can use you to his advantage. Many of you will feel very threatened, because he has lead you to believe that he has power and influence.
Secrecy is the name of the game for this manipulator. He starts with PMs and then requests an email address. He gets away with things because he creates an almost intimate atmosphere between you, and that is his strength.
The effects that this criminal's activities had on members and staff of the forum (paraphrased) and linked from events July 17th - 20th:
07-18-2010 12:30 PM Lonnirose posted that it was the same people over and over (causing the problem). She accused Dyebat and lchris of joining forces with people who were attempting to destroy the forum.
Lonnirose post #430
07-19-2010 05:03 AM Truusbuist posted that there was a planned takeover and that Dyebat and lchris were not honest. Truusbuist post #1083
07-20-2010 01.41 AM Waldog posted that the creation of the (transparency) thread was all the proof anyone needed as to who had the best interests of the members at heart. He also accused Dyebat and lchris of lying and conspiracy. Waldog post 1463
07.19.2010 3.33AM Hulapig’s posts began to be so out of character that members questioned whether it was really her posting. (It was.) She thought she knew the “ringleaders” of the fiasco. Hulapig post #946 She said there would be a place for “all of us”. Hulapig post #1015 Did she refer to the new site Judy had set up?
Hulapig seemed to delight in pronouncing that banned members were being let in. She denied doing it herself, but implied lchiris had. Hulapig post #1029 She claimed that as a member of DJG’s, I would know what was going on. I did not.
For the record, I was a member of DJG's forum in the early days but resigned my membership there in February 2010. I have never been back since.
On August 20th/21st another thread was opened on the forum at susan-boyle.com entitled, "Some Urgent Questions For All".
CanadianBill said that he stood with the Admins and Mods who were 'treated very badly'. He said the forum has been betrayed and duped - but not by staff. He claimed that I, along with lchris and friends at another forum had been 'working together for a long while to orchestrate this. In secret.'
This statement leads me to believe that the O.P. (CanadianBill) was sanctioned by Admin to post in such a way that is directly in contravention of Rule 10 of the forum.
The so-called conspiracy was entirely false. The people who were duped were those listening to the cyber-stalker.
I did have some ideas about ways to minimize some of the problems that continued to plague the forum. I discussed this with both admins on July 13. It was not done in secret. We worked to forge a mutually acceptable way forward. At that point I had every reason to be optimistic because I had no idea what was being said about me behind the scenes.
What on earth could anyone have had to gain in sabotaging a peace plan?
Today in the UK it is Armistice Day (Veterans' Day in the U.S.) and I cannot help but mourn the fact that our own peace plan was so promptly and thoroughly undermined.
On August 20th/21st another thread was opened on the forum at susan-boyle.com entitled, "Some Urgent Questions For All".
CanadianBill said that he stood with the Admins and Mods who were 'treated very badly'. He said the forum has been betrayed and duped - but not by staff. He claimed that I, along with lchris and friends at another forum had been 'working together for a long while to orchestrate this. In secret.'
This statement leads me to believe that the O.P. (CanadianBill) was sanctioned by Admin to post in such a way that is directly in contravention of Rule 10 of the forum.
The so-called conspiracy was entirely false. The people who were duped were those listening to the cyber-stalker.
I did have some ideas about ways to minimize some of the problems that continued to plague the forum. I discussed this with both admins on July 13. It was not done in secret. We worked to forge a mutually acceptable way forward. At that point I had every reason to be optimistic because I had no idea what was being said about me behind the scenes.
What on earth could anyone have had to gain in sabotaging a peace plan?
Today in the UK it is Armistice Day (Veterans' Day in the U.S.) and I cannot help but mourn the fact that our own peace plan was so promptly and thoroughly undermined.
Are we going to let the cyber-stalker bully win this?
I hope not......
