Sentence First - Verdict Afterwards.

‘Let the jury consider their verdict,’ the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.
‘No, no!’ said the Queen. ‘Sentence first — verdict afterwards.’
‘Stuff and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. ‘The idea of having the sentence first!’
‘Hold your tongue!’ said the Queen, turning purple.
‘I won’t!’ said Alice.
‘Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. (Lewis Carroll)

WAMcKinley was one of the original members of forum staff at susan-boyle.com (now SBFII) and she was very well-respected by all members.  By her own admission she had few 'technical skills', but her natural, friendly way with members meant that she didn't need them, especially where moderation was concerned.  She was the first with a 'heads-up' by PM if a member went a step too far, but also the first to support a member who was being intimidated or bullied. Many of us received a reassuring PM from WAM offering staff help and assistance if personal attacks by other members became too much, and for these reasons she was well respected. She was also one of the few staff members who always responded to a PM. Other staff members demanded respect, but fell short of the mark.

Just before Christmas 2009  WAM was removed as moderator.  It was hurtful, and I can personally attest that the official reasons given were completely unwarranted. It was a while before she felt able to participate again on the forum. 

In February this year, WAMcKinley was put into pre-moderation at SBFII, along with a number of members who are also members of another forum.  She made a conscious decision not to post on the forum at SBFII whilst in this position, but was free to correspond with other forum members via PM.

Last June WAM had became involved in a PM conversation with a member of SBFII who I will refer to as 'A.P.'  In that exchange WAM shared her opinions quite openly, but at no time was her intention to intimidate or bully.  Nevertheless, the following email was sent to WAM just a few days later:

From: "Susan Boyle Fans International" <susanboylefansnp@gmail.com>
To: j*********@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2011 5:23:51 PM
Subject: Banned

WAMcKinley

This is to inform you that as of this moment you are banned from the forum.

Sending pm’s to members in order to intimidate them is called bullying.

As per our rules bullying is forbidden in this forum.

Slandering the Admins is also forbidden, as long as you did it outside of our premises we did not take any action. Now you have gone well beyond the line you yourself fixed and quote” I always try to remain within the limits”

You brought that unto yourself now it is up to you to assume the consequences.

The Administration

--
Susan Boyle Fans International

WAMcKinley has passed her side of the PM correspondence with A.P. to me, so that everyone can judge for themselves whether or not her banishment was justified.  She has also asked me to point out that had A.P. asked her to cease the communication at any time, she would have done so.  I have set it out below:

   My comment to : http://suboleaks2theotherside.blogsp...nd-scenes.htm

Default Re: Rewad Knudt's blog

    Thanks. I was able to get it this time. I tried to post a comment, but my ID wasn't accepted and I saw no way to register.--(??) Anyhow,---here's what I tried to reply:

    "Xeno isn't someone to run her mouth when she doesn't have her mind in gear at the same time. In other words, I'm sure xeno knew exactly what she was saying and meant every word of it. She's not the only one among us who has been frustrated with the fact that nothing has changed with the forum since the turn-over last year,---not a damned thing. People are still being muffled and exiled, comments and threads disappear into the mist with abandon, and, in effect, the same rules of repression apply as they always have. whatever happened to the forum for and by the membership we were promised?? Xeno isn't the only one disappointed to see what has become of our forum which had such promise and potential. The fact that active membership has declined sharply in the past year should tell you there are a lot of us who feel the same way. The blog revelations tell the tale of lies and manipulation all the way down the line and they're backed up with facts. If Chris, dyebat, knudt et al were telling lies, wouldn't you think those in power at the forum would come out with guns blazing and facts at the ready to dispute those claims made in the blogs. The fact that there has been nothing but silence from the SBFII admin. speaks volumes. You're right, K****: "When you lie and cheat, the truth comes out eventually." And the truth has been told irrefutably."

    Thanks again for the link! WAM

    6/4/11

Default Re: Rewad Knudt's blog

        There is definitely a C of I in the case of working for two forums, especially when one is a NPO. To quote DJG: "It's interesting to note that the 'staff' are claiming no conflict of interest exists between having a particular person as admin of both their own site and the 'official site', when there's an example of such conflict of interest just today. It seems that a 'promotion' for their own store has been posted on the 'official site'. Normally, such things most certainly wouldn't be allowed on an 'official site', but when the admin is the same person on both sites rules can be bent. So basically, having the same person as admin on both sites allows the 'non-profit' site to benefit financially from the 'official site'. That's a conflict of interest if ever I saw one."

        And as to your question about Chris and dyebat hoping to arrange new admin. for the forum, there was never any secret about that. Many of us who had seen the present admin.'s dirty tricks throughout their tenure were hoping for that very thing, especially when they all resigned last July. It wasn't a matter of "getting rid of" them, as you put it, as they had already resigned. The mistake Chris and dyebat made was trusting them to resume their jobs in a way that was fair to the membership----and allowing them back in with the understanding things would be more democratic now and members would have more say. Well, we all see where THAT went. Straight into the trash-heap. PT and K are running the same kind of repressive dictatorship they always have and show NO signs of stopping. And why should they?? It's all about control and access to Susan. If they're able to finesse that for themselves and their friends, that's all that matters to them. The NPO is a big joke. The powers that be never intended to have it become a NPO and have fought tooth and nail against it. They're not about to share the power with anyone and members are becoming more aware of that every day.

        Say what you will about DJG's. We're free to make comments and ask questions about anything, any time we want. No one swoops iin to tell us we're "off topic" ---or comments are "inappropriate." Comments and threads stay where they are and don't go disappearing into space as if we have a bunch of Mommies taking charge of a bunch of children. It's a free and wonderful place to be. If there's been some bad-mouthing and name-calling, chalk it up to blowing off steam over the repressive treatment we received at the hands of the rigid forum that we no longer recognize as home. 

When WAM received her email from 'the Administration' telling her that she had been banned, she felt that a great injustice had been done to her.  She entered into email correspondence with the forum administration.  Please see for yourselves what was said, and by whom. WAM's words are in blue:

"This is so wrong. I have NEVER sent a PM to any member of this forum 
with the intent to bully them. If you have read any of my PMs, you will 
know this. I have engaged in PM communication with members over several 
points of view as I have been prohibited from posting and this was my 
only way of expressing an opinion. But never, at ANY time did I bully 
anyone. I was always cordial and respectful in my tone and never used 
harsh or argumentative language that could in any way appear 
intimidating. I don't know what this is in response to, but your 
judgement and conclusions in this matter are incorrect. I would very 
much like a means to redress this issue as I feel it is in no way fair."

---

Then Kalua sent this:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Susan Boyle Fans International" <susanboylefansnp@gmail.com>
To: j*********@comcast.net
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 1:14:04 PM
Subject: Re: Banned

WAMcKinley

Let’s set the record strait to start with, you were never prohibited from posting, you are in pre mod and you can post anywhere anytime you want, but your posts have to be approved by a Moderator and as long as they are not controversial they would appear immediately in the forum.

Why didn’t you post your opinions about CoI in the forum as some members did?

Why there was no other candidate proposed from “your side” for the Board? Finally for how long the Admins and staff in this forum will be slandered, subject to libelous accusation, bullying, trashing and bashing? 

You say you never used harsh or argumentative language?, well Admins dirty tricks, repressive dictatorship, corruption seem to us like plain slander.

Do you really want to go thru your history path in the forum? Let’s do it!

You were made a Mod by Paul, when Kalua offered you training you dismissed him with a wave of your hand saying don’t worry I will cope!

You never learned to help a member technically speaking, you never learned to delete a post, you never learned to move or edit a thread, and up to this day you don’t even know how reply with the quote in the post.

When we had the first shipper war you sided with the shippers, when we had the religious war you sided with the religious, so how come you are now with all those flaming the “red scarves religious loonies”?

When Paul discovered you had joined D***’s forum he asked for you to be demoded immediately and banned from the forum.

Do you know who sweet talked Paul for more than 2 days to at least forego the banning sanction? Kalua!

When you started voicing your displeasure against Danileo do you know who tried to arrange things so the banning sanction would not surface again? Kalua!

All you have done since then is trash and debase the Admins, there so much that they can stand, and as said before now you started doing it in the forum via pm, trying to intimidate members, to convince them to share your opinion.

Well no more, now you have your freedom to go your way but outside our premises.

You still have the possibility to address your self to the Appeal Panel, from our part this is the last communication with you.

The administration

     _____________________________________________

   (6/12/11)

Here is WAM's response:

   This may be the last time you plan to communicate with me, but I hope you will allow me the opportunity to address some of the issues you raised in this email.   Some of the criticisms you have made of me are patently incorrect and I would like to clear them up.   First of all, when I was placed on pre-mod, I stated at that time that I didn't intend to post as long as I was under that restriction.   My choice, I know, but as I didn't agree with the sanction, that was the way I responded to it.   So that's why I made no public comment regarding board selections or any other opinion.   It was your choice to treat me with the disrespect of having to have my comments screened before they could appear on a thread,----and my choice to refuse to have that happen.   Having no redress in what I felt and still feel is an overly restrictive treatment, I chose to remain silent.   But I was still left with the option to send personal messages, which I sometimes did.   In the list of forum rules, the only regulation regarding PMs that I could find was that they were to remain private.   So I entered into these correspondences with the understanding that what I was communicating to the other person was a private conversation.   What I had to say was between me and them, no one else.   In no way was my tone or attitude harassing, bullying, or threatening.   I knew I was taking a risk by even considering trying to have a civil discourse with AngelPrecious as our viewpoints are considerably different in just about every way.   But when she made a comment in one of the threads about the blogs that I knew to be false, I wanted to give her my side of things.   Always a mistake trying to reason with the unreasonable,----but I tried, anyhow.   Our PMs were, as far as I am concerned, cordial and friendly, although we remained at opposite ends of the spectrum, which seemed to be fine with both of us.  At least we got to state our own opinions.   Long about the second or third PM, it occurred to me that maybe I ought to keep a record of this communication in case I should ever need to refer to it.   I deleted PMs after the fact, most times, because I was usually running fairly close to a full mailbox.   So I made copies of my last couple of responses to AP and kept them in my email files.   When I was banned and the reason given was bullying, the only reason I could come up with was that AP must have reported my conversations with her.   I was relieved then that I had kept copies of these PMs as proof that no such intimidation ever took place;----and when I read through them again, I knew this to be true.   Anyone reading my words to her can easily see that what I am saying is the truth.   What on earth would I possibly stand to gain by trying to intimidate anyone in the forum, let alone someone like AP who I know to be firmly on the side of the forum admin.??   My mistake was in thinking she might be able to tolerate another point of view besides her own.   I guess I learned the hard way that this wasn't so.

   And what can I say about my term as a moderator,----one that was stymied from the beginning by being kept out of the loop by not being informed of staff meetings??   Only after several months was I finally informed, by accident, by Evie, that there were meetings being held regularly by MSN, of which I wasn't even a member.   Can you begin to imagine how it felt to be so excluded from what was supposed to be a team working in tandem??   It explained a lot then, at the time, as I was always receiving word of things after everyone else and wondering how everyone else seemed to have information I wasn't party to.   It was a real, "Ah HAH" moment,---I can tell you,-----after which I was forevermore looking over my shoulder and watching my step with my "fellow" mods.   Should have seen the writing on the wall at that point and quit.   But something inside me became even more determined to stick it out and keep going.   As a mod, I originally went to DJG's with the intention of looking around and seeing if I might be able to mend some fences between that site and the forum.   In fact, I announced my intentions in the staff room before I went.   All above-board and on record, as I felt was the right thing to do.   So it was a real surprise when DocRobbie sent me the PM, releasing me from mod duties because, as he termed it, he felt I had become "an agent for DJG."   I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised since, for reasons still unknown to me, my entire time as a mod had been under a cloud of suspicion and distrust.

   You claim I never learned to carry out my duties properly.   When Paul asked me to serve as a moderator in the first place, I told him my technical skills were weak.   He assured me that everyone on the team had their own strengths and that I would fit in fine.   I promised to work and learn.   I have no memory of Carlos offering to help me with technical skills;  but if I declined, I'm sure it was more with the idea that I should pick up these things on my own rather than waste someone else's time in bringing me up to speed.   I certainly never gave him "a wave of my hand," as you put it, as though denying I could use help.   I was under the impression we were responsible for our own training.   And I don't know where you got the idea that I never deleted a post or helped anyone in a technical capacity.   I deleted plenty of posts, spam entries, trolls, etc.   I wasn't in the habit of vacuuming up things with abandon as some seemed to enjoy doing and still do.   I find it disrespectful and unnecessary to eliminate members' comments as though they're meaningless and intrusive to the forum.   So if that's a fault, then I suppose I'm guilty.   I am in complete agreement with the members who felt insulted when post after post disappeared at the whim of the mighty mods who seemed to delight in their power.   You'd go back to find something and entire sections,---entire subjects--- would be gone with the wind.   Ridiculous!   No wonder people lost patience and then interest.   I tried to treat members the way I hoped to be treated.   If that's a fault, I plead guilty.

   I moved and edited many a thread, changed thread titles for members, began new threads for members who asked for help,---and more.   I have no idea where you get the idea I didn't do these things.   I had thanks all the time from members for help I rendered and I was happy to do so.   Sometimes I don't reply with a quote because the posts get so long with all the inclusions, I often feel that just to reply with a comment is all that's necessary, especially if my comment follows immediately.   When did this become a problem??   I consider it good housekeeping to keep things brief.   Is this yet another thing I'm being cited for??   If so,---again I plead guilty! 

   If it seems to you that all I have done since being placed on pre-mod is to bash the administration, your mole at DJG's has some very poor reading skills-----or someone has been doing some very selective reading.   Since I have done NO posting here, I must assume that I am being judged on the content of my posts at DJG's,-----something I wouldn't think applicable to my status as membership on this forum.   Your jurisdiction begins and ends at the boundaries of your forum, so why should it matter what someone has said elsewhere?   Everything I have ever said is true, as clearly as I know it to be.   You may not agree with my opinion, but to call it libel is to suggest I am lying.   (BTW, slander is a spoken lie-----and libel is written;--so what you're actually accusing me of is libel.)   As I noted to A****P******, a very revealing factor to me about the blog accusations is that there have been no denials or attempts to counter any of the charges.   When someone tells lies about me or makes false assumptions, my first instinct is to come forward and set the record straight.   That's what I have tried to do here.   I have nothing to hide and therefore nothing to fear in any revelation.   There are many members at the SBFII who I am sure will vouch for my integrity.   I am proud of my record.

Jean Reynolds

(WAMcKinley) 

Knudt has set out her thoughts in her blog Link here and I agree entirely with her logical analysis of the bylaws. 

Unmuddying the Waters.

SBFII recently released a statement regarding former members of that forum which would appear to have been designed to confuse and misinform.  I wish to clarify a couple of points.

1.  My blogs have been based on hard evidence that can be backed up.

2.  Whilst it might be useful for SBFII to 'cloister together' former members of that forum, the fact is that we are neither unified, nor working in concert.

Knudt and I extend the hand of friendship, and amnesty, to any Susan Boyle fan at our new forum The Susan Boyle Fans Forum  as we have done since we opened back in December.  

Contrary to the claims made in the recent SBFII statement, The Susan Boyle Fans Forum does not permit discussion of 'legacy' issues concerning SBFII. It is a sanctuary free from that. We enjoy an atmosphere of mutual respect and friendship there, and so do our members.  We intend to keep it that way and take this opportunity to thank our members for their support in this regard.

Just Following Orders? Nae Excuse!

I have recently received a copy of an email sent by Stevieboy last July.  The member who passed it along assumed that we had already seen it.  Not so.  If others have relevant information that we have not mentioned, please let us know.

When converted to the database time, the email was received at 07:47 am Monday July 19, 2010.

Dear friends, 

I have been asked by Tink to inform you of the situation as it stands right now on the Forum. 
As you might be aware by now, Carlos (Kalua) has resigned as Admin of the site, effective immediately and I and Ross Manarchy (waldog) have also resigned. This is in response to the behaviour by dyebat and Lchris and what is perceived to be an attempt to undermine the Staff. We are also under sustained attack by those member of DJFG's site, who are conspiring to destroy the forum, something they have been trying to do now for many months, even before the recent auction. 

If you wish the bulk of the remaining Staff to remain, then you are requested to say this in the strongest possible terms, for as it stands at the moment, the entire Staff is about to resign en masse.

Thank you,
Graeme

PS Please pass this message on to your friends on the forum, the ones that you can trust!

Tink asked Stevieboy to send the email, so it can be reasonably assumed that she knew what he would say.  I believe that this email further implicates Pickled Tink as one of those coordinating the events of July 2010.

Stevieboy claimed that Dyebat and lchris were trying to undermine staff, but as we have shown, they did no such thing.  They had always expected staff to be in charge, and asked them to return. 

So why had the rumour that Dyebat and lchris wanted to undermine staff been passed around?  Most likely it was the result of their questioning of Kalua’s excessive need for secrecy.  He had refused to provide any identification at all, even though he was to be Director of the Board.  If Dyebat and lchris insisted on it, they had to be discredited.

Stevieboy claimed that the site was “under sustained attack” from DJG members.  We now know that the “sustained attack” had nothing to do with DJG and was done by JudyOkla and Danileo.  But who told Stevieboy that it was the DJGers?

Stevieboy also said that the ”entire Staff is about to resign en masse”.  He asked for members to say if they wanted the staff to remain “in the strongest possible terms”.  This is further confirmation of the ploy by staff to walk out and orchestrate the membership to demand their return.

It is clear that the events of July 18th were coordinated by the several staff members.

It is possible that some of the staff members were unaware that it was a sham and were used by others.  Stevieboy had been trusted by the membership of the forum.  If he knew that that the whole thing was a set-up, it was a betrayal of the forum members.  If he did not know about the activities of JudyOkla and Danileo, it is especially unfortunate that he would be used in this way to spread disinformation.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words.

A brief synopsis of knudt's most recent blogs.....

JudyOkla and Danileo created six new accounts at forum.susan-boyle.com.  They were EvaMarie, kaydaniels (8101), roseym, kaydaniels (8106), Looie and jayme.  They proceeded to give them admin permissions.  Four of the six accounts performed actions as admins on July 18th-20th, including using “access masks” to override forum permissions.

Kaydaniels (8101) was used by JudyOkla on the evening of July 18th.  She moderated posts and modified announcements.

JudyOkla returned to her own account and modified the account of larryF, LonniR’s alter ego. She then edited her own admin permissions as well as those of DocRobbie and lChris.

Danileo logged in as EvaMarie.  The Kaydaniels account was apparently unsatisfactory so EvaMarie 'killed' the account of the first Kaydaniels, removing most (but not all) evidence.

Twelve mins later, JudyOkla switched from her own account to that of roseym.  She performed a variety of actions in the Admin Control Panel before returning to her own account again.

JudyOkla edited the account of 'Nugget' which was another account used by Hulapig.  Then she edited her own admin permissions again.

By 9.12pm, a new (second) account under the name of kaydaniels had been created.  This account was modified and edited by Danileo using the account of EvaMarie. 

JudyOkla edited forum permissions for a variety of threads, using access masks which override other permissions.  This included both Staff room and member threads.  Shortly after 11.00pm, JudyOkla resigned, followed soon after by Danileo.

A mere 10 mins after Danileo resigned, EvaMarie was back on the forum using an IP address of a proxy in Illinois.  EvaMarie edited the account of Looie, another of the newly-created admin accounts.  

EvaMarie returned after midnight on July 19th using yet another proxy, this one in the UK.  EvaMarie altered the record of the original account of Clix Pix.  Then she continued to edit Looie's account.  EvaMarie also edited access masks (permissions) for forum threads.

Then JudyOkla logged in as kaydaniels from her own IP.  She also edited Looie, edited permissions for the Red Room and altered the history for the account of Luz. She also modified/edited the account of jayme.

In the afternoon of July 19th, Danileo logged in as EvaMarie, this time from her own IP, to view the account of a member. 

On July 20th, kaydaniels used the same UK IP that EvaMarie had used, strongly indicating that this IP was a proxy. 

In mid August, JudyOkla and Danileo both admitted to creating new admin accounts but denied using them to change anything.  The evidence suggests otherwise.

One indication that the new admin accounts were not legitimate is the clean up used to hide the evidence.  The first kaydaniels account had been killed.  JudyOkla and Danileo both altered the records of the new admins.  

Pickled Tink viewed the IPs of EvaMarie and Looie, so she was aware of who had used them.  Then she “killed” the accounts.

On July 23rd Pickled Tink checked the IPs used by EvaMarie.  Then she killed that account.  On July 25th, Pickled Tink checked the IP for Looie and then killed that account as well.

A couple of weeks after killing EvaMarie and Looie, Pickled Tink posted the following in the 'Debunking Some Rumours' thread on the forum at SBFII:

"The Investigation in the issues around hacking will be followed through proper channels. We would be  grateful if folk could avoid speculating about “Who done it” as that is counterproductive and actually hinders rather than helps. The fact is that we do NOT know who did what, if anything, at this stage and so speculating and suggesting it might be A, B or C is unhelpful – everyone is innocent until there is evidence and incontrovertible  proof that they are guilty of something."

It appears from the record that Pickled Tink knew far more than she ever admitted.

Facts Are Stubborn Things.

I have prepared a synopsis/summary of relevant points as some readers told us that it would be helpful.  This is the story so far:

No former members were unbanned on July 18th.

No banned members were approved, contrary to the comments made by Pickled Tink in the Board report.

False rumours of forum takeover were spread by staff including LonniR, Waldog and Truus. The cybertroll known as Orgonon/Mark Conner/Walkerd/willson/MaryAnn (et al) was in direct contact with most staff members and told them lies which they believed and acted upon.

LonniR rallied support by perpetuating the lies among certain members.

JudyOkla and Danileo created at least six false identities and attempted to give them Admin powers. They were partially successful. They altered records to hide when the false member accounts were created and when they were given Admin powers.

A new member account was created which Lonnirose used in the name of larryF. This account information was also altered to make it appear that 'he' had joined the forum in 2009. LonniR used this account solely to spread misinformation.

EvaMarie/Danileo logged on to the forum as an Admin. After JudyOkla and Danileo announced their resignations and had apparently left, they continued to work in the Admin Control Panel under false names. EvaMarie/Danileo returned with the same user account, but using two different proxies. A proxy is a way of disguising identity and location when online.  One of these proxies gave a UK location as described in my previous blog.

 

Stay tuned!  Watch this space.....

*Title credited to John Adams.

"Draw the curtain, the fraud is over."

At 8:29 pm, EvaMarie had used the IP address of Danileo. At 11:33 pm, EvaMarie began using the IP address of a known proxy in Woodstock, IL. At 12:18 am on July 19, just 43 minutes later, EvaMarie began using an IP address located in the UK.  There are three possible explanations for that.  She had given the account information to someone in the UK, who had then logged on to the account.  Or she had invented teleportation and could move around the globe with ease.  Or, most likely, that was also a proxy.  (Knudt's blog April 7th)

I want to discuss the fact that EvaMarie (aka Danileo) went to the trouble of using a UK IP at 12.18am on July 19th.  

I feel this is extremely relevant for the following reasons.

We have already established false rumours were circulated, by staff and certain members who had been encouraged by staff, that DJG and his forum members were attempting to take over the forum at susan-boyle.com.

There were also false rumours that a forum I help administrate was involved. On July 18th (the day before) Hulapig had posted in the Transparency thread and hinted that I 'would have a clue' when a member asked who was letting 'banned members' back on to the forum. Knudt has clarified, from the records, that no-one, in fact, was guilty of that.

Danileo/EvaMarie was already using an Illinois proxy. Why change?  What did the second  proxy have that the first didn't?  The answer is a UK IP address.

DJG and I both have UK IP addresses.

Why on earth would Danileo/EvaMarie go to the trouble of using a UK proxy if it were not an attempt to cast suspicion on one of us?

*Title is a quote by Francois Rabelais

The Smear Machine

Character assassination is at once easier and surer than physical assault; and it involves far less risk for the assassin. It leaves him free to commit the same deed over and over again, and may, indeed, win him the honors of a hero in the country of his victims. (Alan Barth)

On 5th August last year, just three weeks after the events of July 18th - 21st, there was a contrived effort on the part of staff and certain 'key players' of SBFII to 'move on' despite the fact that nothing had been resolved as far as determining who had created so much confusion on the forum.  The voices of those who had posted most accusingly in July were heard loudest in August, whilst those members whose names had been smeared were equally as determined that they would not allow the matter to be merely swept under the carpet.  Despite the fact that the party line was to move on, with the general understanding that mistakes had been made on all sides, posts continued to be made by staff members that were inflammatory and that belied acceptance of that premise.  Here is one such example.

LonniR posted the following in a thread started by Pickled Tink entitled, 'Debunking Rumours':

"...Neither Tink nor I resigned until after the hacking and 3 of the new mods never did. That night all the mods were suddently and without warning stripped of our accesses. For a while there we did not know why or what had happened, and then realized we were being inundated with banned members on the forum and were powerless to stop them. I later understood we were locked out for security reasons, but at the time it was as though we had all been fired without notice. It was a very trying situation for everyone involved, but it's all been resolved now and we can move on.

At the time of the July incident, members could join the forum provisionally, subject to moderator approval. No banned members were approved during that period, yet LonniR still perpetuated the rumour and exaggerated the run of events.  Inundated? As a moderator she would have been aware that only three former members had joined, and that none had been approved. 

LonniR claimed that it had 'all been resolved' last August, but had anything been resolved?  Had members discovered the truth about what happened?  Was any retraction made by the Staff or Board of Directors of SBFII regarding the ludicrous claim that 'the DJGers' had planned to take over the forum?  No. The facts had not been uncovered.

Is the truth of what happened then worth any less today than it was then? 

Despite the apparent effort on the part of Staff to persuade members to 'move on', beyond the July events, permission was granted by management to CanadianBill to attack members of another Susan Boyle Fan Site, in the form of his thread entitled "Some Urgent Questions For All".  This information was given to him by Mark Conner/Orgonon (aka the cyber stalker bully.) 

Was the sanctioning of this thread conducive to 'moving on''? 

Now Paulie's forum members and I had become victims of the SBFII smear machine.  The attack against me, personally, was scathing.

The smear machine is the opus operandi by which several members and former members of SBFII (formerly susan-boyle.com) had their characters assassinated either actively or by passive resistance of the administrators.  

The cyber-troll promoted the notion that several forum members, who had had the good fortune to attend Susan's performances several times were stalkers. No firm statement was made to deny or counteract those  allegations by the administrators at SBFII.  Not only were those allegations not denied; they were in at least in one case passed along by Pickled Tink! There is not a shadow of doubt in my mind that the rebuttals should have been immediate and unambiguous.  No such  support was forthcoming from the administration and so these good peoples' names were smeared.  Why?

At the time of the trouble last summer, Danileo inappropriately used her professional nursing experience to lend credibility to her false claim that Dyebat was suffering from dementia.  This unsubstantiated, incorrect and damning diagnosis was perpetuated by Mirrim, and others.  

It was, obviously, a total fabrication that was both erroneous and malicious.

JudyOkla also started making none too subtle references to lchris's state of mind, feigning concern for her well-being within the community.  Every effort was made to suggest that lchris's judgement was impaired through lack of sleep and overwork.  Nothing could have been further from the truth.

Whilst outwardly the impression of 'moving forward together' was promoted by the staff, a very different story was being played out behind the scenes.  The cyber-stalker was still in communication with staff and certain members. He was still believed, despite the fact that the staff themselves recognised him as the pest they had banned on many previous occasions.  Why?

In matters of truth and justice, there is no difference between large and small problems, for issues concerning the treatment of people are all the same. (Albert Einstein)

The Beginning of the End

Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning. (Winston Churchill)

It has been eight months since the events of last July set us on our present path.  Establishing the truth has involved a long period of examination and analysis.  We might have been able to publish our findings a little earlier but we have experienced illness, surgery and other real life situations which took priority.

lChris, dyebat and I have been lied about publicly in particularly vicious ways.  I have been a victim of malicious communication by CB, approved by SBFII staff, and so it is of particular importance to me to make it a matter of public record that this was done without foundation.

For four months we put our faith in the Board of Directors of (the now) SBFII and took them at their word when they promised a full investigation as to what had taken place.

When, after months the promised report failed to appear, Knudt, lChris & Dyebat and I started to blog, in order to bring the truth to light by putting pressure on the Board to have a full examination of the forum record and the results made public. Our actions did appear to have some effect.

A report from the Board of Directors was finally posted in mid November but it became apparent that no thorough investigation had been taken, and that no honest disclosure would be forthcoming.

So we continued with our own investigation.  We examined relevant threads from the July period, establishing a time-line and converting times for data into EST, which is 'forum time'. We continued to blog and to continue to try to clear our names.

By December, it became quite obvious that the administrators at SBFII were not prepared to bring the truth to light and so I made the decision to resign.  So did lChris and dyebat. Knudt did not resign, but was (soon) banned.

It was at this point that dyebat decided that knudt and I could be handed some of the Hostgator records (for the period during which she had been the owner) to carry out a thorough investigation.

In January we received the first part of the database. We then had to learn how to read, search, analyse and interpret it.  We sometimes had to search in several places to find the truth, when attempts had been made to cover it up.  

We received more of the database in March. The pieces of the puzzle began to come together at last.  Despite the delay and the length of the journey to truth, I am able to confirm that we did get definitive answers. We are now posting our findings.

It is regrettable that those responsible for the events of July 18th - 21st did not step forward in an honourable way to admit their parts in what happened.  That would have saved a lot of time and further angst from within the community.  

They Had Come to a Time When No-one Dared Speak His Mind......

 “Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects... totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have by the most eloquent denunciations.” (Aldous Huxley)

Banning knudt was just one part of the new draconian atmosphere at susan-boyle.com.  Now they are treating members cavalierly and breaking their own rules.  They are rewriting history as well as policy.  They have deleted many threads, denying members access to part of the forum record.  

There has recently been another example of the administration not treating  a member at the forum in accordance with their own rules. 

Last week a dedicated fan of Susan Boyle, active on several forums, felt she had no option but to write to the administrators of susan-boyle.com.

These words touched me, because they summarise very eloquently what many of us feel, and so I asked her permission to share them here.

"Pickled Tink and Kalua:

In spite of the fact that I've broken no rules of this forum, not one, not once, and in spite of the fact that I've never been given a warning of any kind, last night I was designated "pre-moderation." I don't even know what that means, but I'm guessing it amounts to a seat in the back row of the Naughty Corner.

In every single post I've made here since this forum was a blog, I've been civil and respectful when speaking my mind. My posts have never been capricious or frivolous. Last night I asked a question because I really wanted to know. My question went unanswered, and my post was deleted, and my name was removed from your list of members. You have violated your own procedures and treated me rudely, without so much as a PM to tell me why.

The legion of your former members, the banned, the damned, and the disgusted are beginning to outnumber you. Your ever-expanding rules and definitions are a lexicon of restrictions, warnings, and punishments. It's way too tedious and banana republic for me. I've been a grownup for quite a while now, and I have no desire to be "pre-moderated" and sent to the Naughty Corner by a couple of paranoid control freaks, who are bent upon squeezing the life out of what once was a very nice place.

Please delete my account.

Sincerely,
Skywriter

Has the forum, as George Orwell wrote, come to a time when no one dared speak his mind?  What are members to think when someone can be punished for simply asking a question?

Speak the Truth and Shame the Devil.

The truth is "hate speech" only to those who have something to hide.

(Michael Rivero)

January 11th 2011 will go down as another dark day in the history of susan-boyle.com.

This afternoon knudt was banned from that forum by kalua for "disruptive beahviour (stet) on the forum."

What had she posted today to deserve such a fate?  What was so disruptive?

Not a thing!

This afternoon Knudt was saving print versions of threads for her own reference.  It is important to her to be accurate in her blogs.

She received an email notification of a PM from kalua.  She had to read the message in her Hotmail account as she was unable to read the message on the forum; she had already been banned.

This is the message she received,

Knudt 

For the last several days you have been copying and printing entire threads.If I see you doing it once more you or one of your croonies I will ban you and the lot. 

I'm absolutely sure that the international court in The Hague will accept your complaint. 

Your behaviour in this forum has become intolerable, you are warned! and if this pm lands in your blog, the same applies a complete ban.

Kalua
Administrator

It is a good thing that someone is preserving threads from susan-boyle.com because today quite a few 'disappeared'.  

Why?  Unless there is something to hide of course.....