The Terri Shiavo Controversy - DPChallenge Forums

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

03/25/2005 09:08:44 PM · #301

Milo655321,

I think This is the clip you were going for.

It is indeed pathetic.

Message edited by author 2005-03-25 21:11:05.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

03/25/2005 09:22:35 PM · #302

Originally posted by RonB:

Originally posted by bdobe:
The nomination is invalid because Congressman Mike Bilirakis is not qualified to submit a valid nomination to the Nobel Prize committee -- see the Nobel Prize nominating qualifications.

Well, shame on Bilirakis then. But how does HIS improper act become evidence of the "close ties" you chargee Hammesfahr with?

Name me some other people who have gone to the trouble to nominate casual acquaintences or people they've just heard about for a Nobel. I believe that filing such papers would indicate "close ties" more than it would imply "casual acquaintence" to the average, reasonable person. I am pretty sure the Nobel nomination forms require some detailed reasons supporting the nomination; it's not just a form you fill out online and send in bulk like an Americal Idol vote or a complaint letter to the FCC.

Message edited by author 2005-03-25 21:30:45.

03/25/2005 09:25:01 PM · #303

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Milo655321,

I think This is the clip you were going for.

It is indeed pathetic.

... curse you and your technological prowess ...

Message edited by author 2005-03-25 21:26:08.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

03/25/2005 09:25:21 PM · #304

Originally posted by milo655321:

Thank you for that information, bdobe. I hadn't known that. If you don't mind, I would like to extrapolate on that theme.

I think we can agree, RonB, that Dr. Hammesfahrâ��s claim from his website:

"Dr. Hammesfahr was nominated for the Nobel Prize for his work in Medicine and Physiology in 1999."

damages his credibility?

Yes, I agree. That does damage his credibility. I have never contended that it didn't.

Originally posted by milo655321:

I suppose you could contend that Dr. Hammesfahr was in fact nominated for a Nobel Prize, but, under that reasoning, so could I, if only I could get my darn brother to send a letter to the Nobel Prize Committee nominating me. (He's real stubborn that way, but still just a qualified under Nobel Prize nominating rules as Congressman Mike Bilirakis.) However, having achieved my brotherâ��s Nobel Prize nomination, I think you would be within you rights to deride me if I promoted myself as a Nobel Prize nominee.

I did a little research on Michael Bilirakis to see his qualifications. Here are his educational credits:
BS, University of Pittsburgh, 1955-59
Attended George Washington University 1959-60
JD, University of Florida, 1961-63
For most of his career, he has been a lawyer and a politician.

Being a lawyer and a politician does not make him a Republican Activist. And even if it did, no "close ties" were documented.

Originally posted by milo655321:

Enough of me. Do you think Dr. Hammesfahr's claims of being a Nobel Prize nominee damage his credibility?

You have a habit of repeating yourself. So, I guess that I must also. Yes, I agree. That does damage his credibility. I have never contended that it didn't.

Originally posted by milo655321:

No, no, wait, don't answer that yet.

Ooops. Sorry. I already did.

Originally posted by milo655321:

I've got a better one. Iâ��ve got a hypothetical question. Do you think that Dr. Hammesfahr's claims to being a Nobel Prize nominee damage his credibility IF he had found on behalf of the prevailing side in the Terri Shiavo case?

Yes. That does damage his credibility. I have never contended that it didn't.

Originally posted by milo655321:

Answer the second question above first.

Sorry again. But, if you had wanted the second question answered first, you should have re-arranged your post.

Originally posted by milo655321:

To recap and to reorder:
1) Damaged credibility finding FOR prevailing side in the Terri Shiavo case?

Yes.

Originally posted by milo655321:

2) Damaged credibility finding AGAINST prevailing side in the Terri Shiavo case?

Yes.

But the issue between bdobe and myself has nothing to do with credibility based on verifiable data. It has to do with his attack on Dr. Hammesfahr's credibility by posting false accusations of ties to religious and political organizations with activist agendas - neither of which was he able to substantiate. I do not appreciate the use of religious pejoratives in general, and I especially do not appreciate the false denigration of a religious group by claiming a falsified association to someone whose credibility CAN be legitimately questioned for OTHER reasons, but NOT for religious reasons.

Message edited by author 2005-03-25 21:26:53.

03/25/2005 09:44:16 PM · #305

Thank you for the reply, but I wasn't referring to bdobe's assertions regarding anyone's political affiliation or connections, just to the information regarding Dr. Hammesfahr's credibility. So we are in agreement that Dr. Hammerfahr's credibility has been damaged due to his false claim of being a (legitimate) Nobel Prize nominee.

I suppose you could, in his defense, rightly claim that Dr. Hammesfahr never claimed to be a "legitimate" Nobel Prize nominee, but ... well, that would be pointless and embarrassing.

p.s. If you think I repeat myself often, you've obviously never proofread and made corrections on a thirty page legal brief. (Just so no one gets the wrong idea, I'm a legal secretary, not a lawyer.)

Message edited by author 2005-03-25 21:49:17.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

03/25/2005 09:46:30 PM · #306

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by bdobe:
The nomination is invalid because Congressman Mike Bilirakis is not qualified to submit a valid nomination to the Nobel Prize committee -- see the Nobel Prize nominating qualifications.

Well, shame on Bilirakis then. But how does HIS improper act become evidence of the "close ties" you chargee Hammesfahr with?

Name me some other people who have gone to the trouble to nominate casual acquaintences or people they've just heard about for a Nobel. I believe that filing such papers would indicate "close ties" more than it would imply "casual acquaintence" to the average, reasonable person. I am pretty sure the Nobel nomination forms require some detailed reasons supporting the nomination; it's not just a form you fill out online and send in bulk like an Americal Idol vote or a complaint letter to the FCC.

OK. For the sake of argument, as you defend William, let me grant for the moment that this constitutes "close ties".

Now all one of you has to do is to provide evidence that Congressman Bilirakis is a "Republican party activist",...

and then, assuming that you CAN provide that evidence, find at least ONE MORE "republican party activist" in order to meet bdobe's claim of "close ties to Republican party activists" ( his charge, after all, DID use the plural form ).

Oh, and perhaps some of you defenders can find some close ties to "fundamentalist evangelical organizations" too? I'm sure that William would, at this point, welcome all the help he can find.

RonB

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

03/25/2005 09:51:00 PM · #307

Originally posted by milo655321:

Thank you for the reply, but I wasn't referring to bdobe's assertions regarding anyone's political affiliation or connections, just to the information regarding Dr. Hammesfahr's credibility. So we are in agreement that Dr. Hammerfahr's credibility has been damaged due to his false claim of being a (legitimate) Nobel Prize nominee.

I suppose you could, in his defense, rightly claim that Dr. Hammesfahr never claimed to be a "legitimate" Nobel Prize nominee, but ... well, that would be pointless and embarassing.

p.s. If you think I repeat myself often, you've obviously never proofread and made corrections on a thirty page legal brief. (Just so no one gets the wrong idea, I'm a legal secretary, not a lawyer.)

Yes, I am aware of that. But I didn't want to digress from trying to get bdobe to respond to the charges against HIS credibility. He'd love nothing more than to have the thread head in a different direction to take the focus off of his postings of false accusations and anti-Christian rhetoric.

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

03/25/2005 09:57:23 PM · #308

Originally posted by RonB:

Agreed, then. I was just addressing Dr. Hammesfahr's lack of credibility.

Judith Polakoff

Nikon D7000

03/25/2005 11:51:42 PM · #309

It's gratifying to see that some information about Judge Greer is finally coming to light in the mainstream media, and I wonder, now that we know he is a Republican and a religious man, a regular church-goer (well, at least he was, until his pastor asked him to resign his church membership), how the right-wing will maintain its false accusation of "judicial activism"? Not to mention the fact that scores of judges spanning the entire political spectrum have reviewed this case and have all come to the same conclusion. How does one argue the claim of judicial activism when many of the judges in question are not "liberal" or Democrat?

spiderman

Canon EOS-D60

03/26/2005 01:06:11 AM · #310

2 interesting links ---

the first is a long read - gets good half way through - it's the brief filed by the court-appointed GAL (Guardian Ad Litem) who spent time in Terri's hospice room, while both Michael and Terri's parents visited, while she was being cared for by nurses ...

GAL Report

the second is a newspaper story that alleges that although all involved parties were in total agreement about Terri's care for the 1st 3 years, her parents had a falling out with Michael when he wouldn't share a $300K settlement with them

Bangor Daily News

bdobe

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

03/26/2005 01:09:13 AM · #311

Spiderman,

Those charges have already been covered and, I'd contend, satisfactorily addressed much earlier in this thread.

spiderman

Canon EOS-D60

03/26/2005 01:10:18 AM · #312

sorry to backtrack - didn't read all 4 pages of this thread as carefully as i should have ---- but they ARE still interesting ...

Message edited by author 2005-03-26 01:11:56.

bdobe

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

03/26/2005 01:30:28 AM · #313

A North Carolina man was charged by the FBI on Friday with offering a $250,000 bounty for the murder of Michael Schiavo, the husband of a brain-damaged Florida woman dying in a hospice after years of legal wrangling with her parents.

Richard Alan Meywes was arrested without incident at his home in Fairview, the FBI said. Tim Stutheit, an FBI spokesman in Charlotte, declined to give Meywes' age.

[...]

Meywes is accused of sending an e-mail putting a $250,000 bounty "on the head of Michael Schiavo" and another $50,000 to eliminate a judge who denied a request to intervene in the Schiavo case, the FBI said in a prepared statement. The FBI did not identify the judge.

"It is my understanding that whoever eliminates Michael Schiavo from the plant while inflicting as much pain and suffering that he can bear stands to be paid this reward in cash," the e-mail said, according to a text of the message contained in an affidavit prepared by Tampa FBI agent A.J. Gilman.

[article - emphasis added.]

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

I'd argue that this is the result of the demagoguery and baseless accusations that many fundamentalists right-wing fanatics are hearing on right-wing talk radio, and which then gets repeated without challenge by our mainstream media. This is really sick, and no one is addressing this vociferous faction directly and forcefully.

Well, since our American mainstream media is so pathetic and an utter failure when it comes to addressing the real issues, players and challenges surrounding this and MANY OTHER ISSUES facing the American public, concerned citizens must go abroad to find out real truthful coverage of what's going on in our country. Please note that the following is not a disparaging statement against any group; rather, it is an honest account of what we know and see is taking place, but are often browbeaten into not uttering out loud for fear of reprisal:

Lobbied by the Christian right, which has felt emboldened since helping President Bush win re-election last November, the Republican-led Congress rushed through a law last weekend giving federal courts jurisdiction [in Mrs. Shiavo's situation].

- From the New Zealand Herold - note that I added "in Mrs. Shiavo's situation" for clarification.

Message edited by ClubJuggle - Terms of Service section 4.2(v).

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

03/26/2005 01:53:05 AM · #314

Found this website which has the timeline of the legal battle in this case. Much more information also available on this site.

Timeline of Events:

February 1990â�¦ Terri suffers cardiac arrest and a severe loss of oxygen to her brain

May 1990â�¦ Terri leaves hospital and is brought to a rehabiliation center for aggressive therapy

July 1990â�¦ Terri is brought to the home where her husband and parents live; after a few weeks, she is brought back to the rehabilitation center

November 1990â�¦ Terri is taken to California for experimental therapies

January 1991â�¦ Terri is returned to Florida and placed at a rehabilitation center in Brandon

July 1991â�¦ Terri is transfered to a skilled nursing facility where she receives aggressive physical therapy and speech therapy

May 1992â�¦ Michael and the Schindlers stop living together

January 1993â�¦ Michael recovers $1 million settlement for medical malpractice claim involving Terri's care; jury had ruled in Michael's favor on allegations Terri's doctors failed to diagnose her bulimia, which led to her heart failure; case settled while on appeal

March 1994â�¦ Terri is transferred to a Largo nursing home

May 1998â�¦ Michael files petition for court to determine whether Terri's feeding tube should be removed; Michael takes position that Terri would chose to remove the tube; Terri's parents take position that Terri would chose not to remove the tube

February 2000â�¦ Following trial, Judge Greer rules that clear and convincing evidence shows Terri would chose not to receive life-prolonging medical care under her current circumstances (i.e., that she would chose to have the tube removed)

April 2000â�¦ Terri is transferred to a Hospice facility

January 2001â�¦ Second District Court of Appeal affirms the trial court's decision regarding Terri's wishes

April 23, 2001â�¦ Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision

April 23 or 24, 2001â�¦ Trial court orders feeding tube removed

April 24, 2001â�¦ Terri's feeding tube is removed

April 26, 2001â�¦ Terri's parents file motion asserting they have new evidence regarding Terri's wishes

April 26, 2001â�¦ Trial court denies Terri's parents' motion as untimely

April 26, 2001â�¦ Terri's parents file new legal action against Michael Schiavo and request that the removal of Terri's feeding tube be enjoined; the case is randomly assigned to Judge Quesada

April 26, 2001â�¦ Judge Quesada grants the temporary injunction, orders Terri's feeding tube restored

July 2001â�¦ Second District rules that Judge Greer erred in denying the motion alleging new evidence and, in essence, orders the trial court to consider whether new circumstances make enforcement of the original order inequitable; Second District also reverses the temporary injunction and orders dismissal of much of the new action filed before Judge Quesada
(uncertain)â�¦ Terri's parents detail their reasons why enforcement is inequitable: (1) new witnesses have new information regarding Terri's wishes, and (2) new medical treatment could sufficiently restore Terri's cognitive functioning such that Terri would decide that, under those circumstances, she would continue life-prolonging measures; Terri's parents also move to disqualify Judge Greer
(uncertain)â�¦ Trial court denies both motions as insufficient

October 2001â�¦ Second District affirms the denial of the motion to disqualify and the motion regarding the new witnesses; the appellate court reverses the order with regard to potential new medical treatments and orders a trial on that question with doctors testifying for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor

March 2002â�¦ Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision

October 2002â�¦ Judge Greer holds a trial on the new medical treatment issue, hearing from doctors for both sides and a court-appointed independent doctor; Terri's parents also assert that Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state
Schindlers file emergency motion for relief from judgment based on a
1991 bone scan report indicating Terri's body had previously been subjected to trauma

November 22, 2002â�¦ Following trial, Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion for relief (new medical evidence motion), rules that no new treatment offers sufficient promise of improving Terri's cognitive functioning and that Terri is, in fact, in a persistent vegetative state

November 22, 2002â�¦ On this same day, Judge Greer denies Schindlers' emergency motion related to the 1991 bone scan

June 2003â�¦ Second District affirms the trial court's decision denying Schindlers' motion for relief from judgment

August 2003â�¦ Florida Supreme Court denies review of the Second District's decision

September 2003â�¦ Terri's parents file federal action challenging Florida's laws on life-prolonging procedures as unconstitutional

October 10, 2003â�¦ Federal court dismisses Schindlers' case

October 15, 2003â�¦ Terri's feeding tube is disconnected

October 20, 2003â�¦ Florida House passes a bill to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri's and restore her feeding tube

October 21, 2003â�¦ Federal court rejects injunction request

October 21, 2003â�¦ Florida House and Senate pass a bill known informally as "Terri's Law" to permit the Governor to issue a stay in cases like Terri's and restore her feeding tube ; Governor signs the bill into law and immediately orders a stay; Terri is briefly hospitalized while her feeding tube is restored

October 21, 2003â�¦ Michael brings suit against the Governor, asking to enjoin the Governor's stay on grounds "Terri's Law" is unconstitutional; Judge Baird rejects Michael's request for an immediate injunction, allowing the tube to be restored, and requests briefs on the constitutional arguments involving the new law

November 7, 2003â�¦ Judge Baird rejects Governor's motion to dismiss Michael's suit and have case litigated in Tallahassee

November 20, 2003â�¦ Judge Baird rejects Governor's request for the judge to recuse himself

December 1, 2003â�¦ Guardian ad litem appointed under "Terri's Law" to advise Governor submits report to Governor

December 10, 2003â�¦ Second District rejects Governor's effort to have Judge Baird disqualified

April 2004â�¦ Second District affirms Judge Baird's decision denying Governor's motion to dismiss and have case litigated in Tallahassee

May 2004â�¦ Judge Baird declares "Terri's Law" unconstitutional on numerous grounds

June 2004â�¦ Second District certifies "Terri's Law" case directly to the Florida Supreme Court

July 2004â�¦ Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment based on Pope John Paul II speech

September 2004â�¦ Florida Supreme Court affirms Judge Baird's ruling that "Terri's Law" is unconstitutional

October 2004â�¦ Judge Greer denies Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on Pope John Paul II speech)

December 1, 2004â�¦ Governor asks U.S. Supreme Court to review Florida Supreme Court's decision declaring "Terri's Law" unconstitutional

December 29, 2004â�¦ Second District affirms (without written opinion) Judge Greer's ruling denying Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment

January 6, 2005â�¦ Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, alleging Terri never had her own attorney, that the trial court impermissibly applied the law retroactively, and that the original trial on Terri's wishes violated separation of powers principles

January 24, 2005â�¦ U.S. Supreme Court declines review in "Terri's Law" case

February 11, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer denies Schindlers' latest motion for relief from judgment

February 23, 2005â�¦ Florida's Department of Children and Families asks to intervene and for 60-day stay to permit investigation of alleged abuse

February 23, 2005â�¦ Schindlers file motion requesting new tests to determine Terri's status

February 25, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer rules motions appear endless, he will grant no further stays; sets March 18 date for removal of feeding tube

February 28, 2005â�¦ Schindlers file motion requesting that Terri be fed orally

March 2, 2005â�¦ Schindlers file new motion for relief from judgment, arguing factual error in original judgment

March 8, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion to feed Terri orally

March 9, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer denies Schindlers' motion requesting new tests

March 9, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer denies Schindlers' most recent motion for relief from judgment (motion based on factual error)

March 10, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer denies Department of Children and Families request to intervene and for stay, finds agency is free to investigate

March 16, 2005â�¦ Second District affirms Judge Greer's denial of Schindlers' motion raising various due process challenges, emphasizes law has been followed in this case

March 18, 2005â�¦ Schindlers file new federal action arguing due process violations in original trial; case assigned to Judge Moody

March 18, 2005â�¦ Judge Moody denies new federal claim, citing lack of jurisdiction

March 18, 2005â�¦ Congressional committee issues subpoenas for Michael, Terri, and Terri's caregivers to appear at hearing to be held at the hospice where Terri has stayed

March 18, 2005â�¦ Congressional committee files motion to intervene and modify order requiring the removal of Terri's feeding tube

March 18, 2005â�¦ Judge Greer denies congressional committee motion, ruling no grounds exist for intervention

March 18, 2005â�¦ Congressional committee requests Florida Supreme Court and Second District stay the feeding tube's removal

March 18, 2005â�¦ Terri's feeding tube removed for the third time

March 18, 2005â�¦ Florida Supreme Court denies congressional committee request, citing lack of jurisdiction

March 18, 2005â�¦ Second District denies congressional committee request as without merit

March 21, 2005â�¦ Congress enacts Terri's Law II, authorizing Terri's parents to seek federal court review of whether Terri's federal rights have been protected

March 21, 2005â�¦ Schindlers file new action in federal court based on new law, claiming Terri's federal rights have been violated

March 22, 2005â�¦ Judge Whittemore denies Schindlers' request to have Terri's feeding tube reinserted, finding no substantial likelihood the Schindlers will succeed with their claims

March 23, 2005â�¦ In a 2-1 decision, Eleventh Circuit affirms Judge Whittemore's decision not to restore Terri's feeding tube

All court decisions can be found at this site:
//abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html

Message edited by author 2005-03-26 02:17:09.

nsbca7

03/26/2005 02:08:30 AM · #315

If it was me, I would say pull the tubes. If it was my wife and she told me at some point that she would not want to live out her life on life support, I would say pull out the tubes.

I went through a similar ordeal when my father had a failed heart surgery several years ago. He had told me and many other people throughout his life that he would never want to live in a condition of life support. He hated to even go in to a hospital. My sister ordered the docters to keep him alive even though he was comatose and his body was in a deteriorative state from lack of circulation.

Luckily his ordeal only lasted several weeks.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

03/26/2005 09:17:31 AM · #316

Originally posted by spiderman:

This is an excellent read. I highly recommend anyone interested in this case read the document in its entirety. It offers an excellent history of the case, with very little "legalese."

Originally posted by spiderman:

the second is a newspaper story that alleges that although all involved parties were in total agreement about Terri's care for the 1st 3 years, her parents had a falling out with Michael when he wouldn't share a $300K settlement with them

Bangor Daily News

To be fair, this is a bylined opinion article, not an actual news story. The biases of the writer are clear from the language used.

-Terry

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

03/26/2005 10:10:59 AM · #317

An interesting recent development from The San Luis Obispo Tribune, though apparently it's a Knight Ridder article. The first paragraph of the article reads:

Hours after a judge ordered that Terri Schiavo wasn't to be removed from her hospice, a team of Florida law enforcement agents were en route to seize her and have her feeding tube reinserted - but they stopped short when local police told them they would enforce the judge's order, The Miami Herald has learned.

The article goes on to describe the events that transpired on Thursday after Judge Greer's latest decision. I think we had the surreal challenge a week or two too early.

Well, off to the cemetary to take pictures!

Edited for spelling/spacing.

Message edited by author 2005-03-26 10:12:47.

bdobe

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

03/26/2005 01:14:02 PM · #318

Once again, the best commentary and criticism on the mainstream media is being made by the incomparable Jon Stewart. Click on the image for the Quicktime clip:

nsbca7

03/26/2005 06:45:46 PM · #319

Originally posted by milo655321:

Yes I heard that on NBC Radio News this morning. Governor Bush sent a number of FLA State Troopers to rescue the lady, but the local police following the rule of law and the judges orders set up road blocks and held the State troopers off. I think Jeb may be posturing for the White House in the next election.

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

03/26/2005 07:58:00 PM · #320

Originally posted by nsbca7:

Yes I heard that on NBC Radio News this morning. Governor Bush sent a number of FLA State Troopers to rescue the lady, but the local police following the rule of law and the judges orders set up road blocks and held the State troopers off.

I think Jeb may be posturing for the White House in the next election.

Posturing? As in it was something good that he did by sending a squad of police to storm a hospital and kidnap a woman from other police who are upholding a courts decision and keeping her there, possible leading to an armed standoff?

Message edited by author 2005-03-26 19:58:26.

nsbca7

03/26/2005 08:00:10 PM · #321

Originally posted by MadMordegon:

Originally posted by nsbca7:
Yes I heard that on NBC Radio News this morning. Governor Bush sent a number of FLA State Troopers to rescue the lady, but the local police following the rule of law and the judges orders set up road blocks and held the State troopers off.

I think Jeb may be posturing for the White House in the next election.

Posturing? As in it was something good that he did by sending a squad of police to storm a hospital and kidnap a woman from other police who are upholding a courts decision and keeping her there, possible leading to an armed standoff?

Not in my eyes, but in the fudimentalist community he is a hero tonight.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

03/26/2005 11:08:44 PM · #322

Gentlemen,
Another gentle reminder, please keep the discussion to behavior, and not general disparagement of any person or group. Violations of the site Terms of Service are taken seriously.
This thread has generated repeated "reported posts". I understand the divisive nature of the topic, but it can be discussed without resorting to attacks.
Carry on.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

03/27/2005 12:41:49 AM · #323

It would prove interesting to know just which of the camps generated the most "Reported Posts", without naming them of course. We could simply limit ourselves to... Camp A 35--- Camp B 2, and wonder.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

03/27/2005 03:35:31 AM · #324

Originally posted by RayEthier:

It would prove interesting to know just which of the camps generated the most "Reported Posts", without naming them of course. We could simply limit ourselves to... Camp A 35--- Camp B 2, and wonder.

It's been roughly equal. Everyone, please play nice. Address the issues, don't attack the person. Also, please usse extreme caution not to make broad generalizaions about any ethnic, racial, gender, religious or other protected group, as additional violations will likely result in the locking of this thread.

The vast majority of the participants in this thread have been remarkaby civil considering the topic, but there are a few whose posts consistently have a combative and argumentative tone to them, and a few others who have been a bit careless with the above-mentioned item of the Terms of Service. I'm asking all of those people to please "cool it" and not ruin things for the majority of the group.

I'm also asking that majority to make use of the Report Post feature and then move on without replying to the post in question, so we can act on problem posts immediately. This both prevents those posts from dragging the discussion down, and save those of us on Site Council a lot of work. It's a lot easier to remove a problem post when it is near the end of a thread, than it is to try to extricate it from the discussion hours later.

Thanks,
-Terry

Message edited by author 2005-03-27 03:49:03.