Just A Reminder

Read 44

Obviously lots of people have never read the terms of service we agreed to when we signed up to blog.

In addition to what you have mentioned , under the "conduct and use" section, here are a few of the policies we are to adhere to:

You agree not to post content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, libelous,  or invasive of one's privacy.

In addition, you agree not to post content that is false, disrupts the normal flow of dialog with an excessive number of messages,  or "stalk" or otherwise harass anyone.

Hmmm...

Good additional information.  Thank you.

Read44,

Thanks for starting this blog.

As always, old folk that I am, I left out one important point: Your account on MCS may be terminated with or without notice for any violation and for any other reason.

You agree not to post content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, libelous,  or invasive of one's privacy.

There are some liberals on this site have broken this agreement......LOL.

Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net

I probably didn't read them if the truth be told.    I remember being a bit bewildered when Roy Lyons blog was pulled months ago.  I am still more bewildered at what I've seen allowed since. 

There is a very interesting Letter to the Editor from Sheriff Beesler in today's (2-9-08) MCS re the blog site.  This blog seems like an appropriate place to comment on that letter.

Most of us use a psuedonym on the blog site for a variety of reasons - anonymity being #1 - I presume.  Since the beginning of the site, many have "come out" as to their real identity, and others have blogged under more than one psuedonym.  Using multiple personas has created some confusion, and to me, reduces the credibility of the site.

I can appreciate wanting to remain anonymous - for a variety of reasons - but, assuming multiple identities doesn't make any sense, unless you have some ulterior motive.  Like posting a position, then supporting your own position with a different identity.

Anonymity seems to also bring out the worst in us.  I can't help but believe that if a blogger were self-identified, it would greatly reduce the meanness and vitriol on this site.  But, in all fairness, anonymity and blogging do go hand-in-hand, thus compromising the credibility of any blog site.

I think a lot of good has come from the site, but, the angry rants and false accusations do detract from the overall benefit.  I don't expect anyone to reveal their true identity, but, as for me, I take with a grain of salt any postings by people who constantly rant, hurl accusations, and slur people's good names all the while hiding behind some cute (or not so cute) blog name.

Bill "Baxley" Garrison

Bax

Very good points. Maybe this whole thread should be "required reading."

I'd also like to add that if you or I write a "letter to the editor" for publication consideration, the editor verifies the identification of the person. Printing anonymous blogs containing misinformation (which is common on the blogs) has become a common practice of the MCS. Too bad MCS doesn't hold themselves to a higher standard.

Yes, Bill, the angry rants, slurs, accusations, etc. do detract from this sight. To see it in print is not excusable.

Baxley, thanks for the heads up on what's in the paper edition of MCS, I want to see what it says.

I agree with everything you've said and I've been complaining about this issue for awhile now as I watched the integrity of the site turn into nothing more then a common chatroom.  These blogs shouldn't be used to tear down any individual, question what they do, perhaps but there is a wide gap between the two. 

With the Sheriffs race I believe there are a few, and I do mean very few who just want to be able to comment without endangering their jobs, and its a shame they feel they have to.  However I fully believe there are a few others who are just supporters of Mike Taylor and the blog is being used for "dirty politics"  That does nothing to make Mike Taylor shine in my eyes. 

This mess with the CCAC is the same, it's a smear campaign on both sides and the validity of the issue is now moot so far as I am concerned.  Let the court figure out who is right and who is wrong.

To those of you out there with multiple names, you have a personal writing style that can be recognized by anyone paying attention, MCS may not stop you but the only foolishness being pointed out is your own.   

To those of you who care about the site and want it to be something productive rather then a gossip column do not engage these people.  If they are ignored long enough maybe they will go away.

I am now running into people almost on a weekly basis who know who I am from the blogs.....it's reaching that many people.  Lets not let that go to waste.

I was very surprised when Mit dropped from the race I thought he was doing good anyone have any thoughts about why they think he dropped out??

TruthHurts

Glad you've thought of something else to discuss. Thoughts on Romney need to be on a different thread. Start a new one.

This site isn't just a chatroom by any means, folks.  The exchange of often interesting and sometimes important information continues with a freedom, not to mention speed, that should be astounding instead of taken for granted.

Unfortunately, one of those freedoms, anonymity, shields one from the responsibilities of honesty and civility, as a few of the blogging contributors have demonstrated.

Civility is quickly dispatched in any discussion on MCS about Clay County Animal Control, which will usually end the participation of anyone who hasn't heated their emotions to a boiling point. And the caplock, folks, only makes things more difficult to read, which drives more people away from those blogs.

I haven't personally met any of the candidatesfor sheriff, including the incumbent, although I did see the three challengers appear together at a public forum recently.  I'd venture to guess that the blog contributions from some of candidate Mike Taylor's supporters have done him more harm than good. Though sometimes more articulate than the blogs about Animal Control, they are no more civil.  In addition, they are often distorted and fractious enough to warrant a questions of honesty.

Blogging under more than one username within the same blog is without question dishonest, which is the nicest word I could use to describe it.  And Marsha's right about it being pretty obvious to anyone who pays attention to writing styles. A person can change their username, but they can't change who they are. Reminds me of something I heard from one of the world's greatest observers of human nature, Bill Engvall - You can't change stupid.

Perhaps if that kind of thing can't be stopped, MCS could provide a solution with an asterisk at the end of a multiple-named user's contribution.  For me, it might go something like this:

* also blogs under the usernames TwoMann, ThreeMann and FourMann.

By the way, if bloggers think they're wasting their time talking about the issues of Clay County, I'd suggest they tune in to County Commission and School Board meetings.  Those folks may swear up and down that they don't read what's going on here, but listen long enough and you'll hear them saying things like they quoted it directly from an MCS blogger.  We have already affected local government.

Clay County's politically powerful, both in and outside the spotlight, will continue to reinforce the notion that we're all just a handful of self-absorbed whiners, bitchers and moaners who offer complaints but no solutions.  But they'll also continue to pay attention, whether they admit it or not, as long as we continue to discuss issues with honesty and civility.

Michael S. Mann

michaelsmann@comcast.net

Mike,

In your sentance, "Unfortunately, on of the freedoms, anonymity, shields one from the responsibilities of honesty & civility, as a few of the blogging contributors have demonstrated," is quite true.  But there is another side to anonymity, one of which I am very familiar.

While anonymity can indeed shield the identity of a blogger, giving them leave to abandon civility and responsibility, it can also be quite the reverse.  It can shield the blogger from the same thing.  I know that for a fact.  I went through a period of a few harassing phone calls stemming from some letters to the editor I wrote in the Times Union & one in the Miami Herald.  Yes, I got a harassing long distance call from the Miami area.  The reason was quite obvious.  I hold views on politics & religion that tend to go against the grain of this particular geographical area of the country.  It's that simple.  I changed my user name on these blogs but was recognised nonetheless.  I "came out," & 'fessed up.  I also made it very clear that no person on the blogs was my reason for doing what I did.

While I find it unfortunate that an incident like this may be more probable in an area like this, I also am acutely aware of the facts of life & its consequences so I remain as alert & aware of my surroundings as I can.  I know for a fact that while at least one blogger knows my identity, maybe more, I have had no reason to fear anything from my fellow bloggers.  Quite the contrary.  But I thought you should know that there may be more than one reason that a blogger would change their user name.  I can't comment on multiple user names as I have not come across any.  But as I've stated in a previous blog concerning this, there are legitimate reasons for using multiple names.  Not many, but some.

Thanks for listening to my two cents worth.

RichK

Mike/Rich;

I agree with you both. I'm a pretty private person so I'm careful about revealing who I am etc. but I just can't imagine trying to have more than one personality on this blog site.

Heck, if I can get 1 in 5 of my responses to make sense, stay on track and perhaps at least sound like I'm a little more educated than the 5th grade I consider myself lucky.

I was always told you could get away with talking to yourself as long as you didn't try to answer yourself. Sometimes I may sound like I like to hear myself talk, but I would think it is way too hard to watch myself type.

As long as I don't make Marsha CAPS LOCK me I think I'll be OK.   

Mike Heemer

Well as you regulars know, I had my meltdown, and my one memorable (for me forgettable) blog.  Occasionally we all have a tendency to have a meltdown.  As some of you told me, get my medication regulated.  I had to laugh, and even agree with you, even though I am not on medication (perhaps I should be.).

I have noticed, and stated earlier, that the MCS blog is permeated by politics.  We really never get to know each other, just each others views on certain subjects.

I belong to numerous and varied blogs, and MCS stands out as the "garden of eden" of political blogs.  It seems that all MCS bloggers have on their mind is the political situation of Clay county.  While I will agree (sometimes I do change my mind)  that the political antics of the elected officials of Clay would make a great soap opera, I am disappointed that I really don't know much about the regular bloggers.  I think (now I am in trouble), that I have a feel for  Marsha, Solo, and Munsey.  It is strange that I seem to understand, and admire those people, when there are so many who post messages.  Oops, I almost for Baxley, and CCC.  Their blogs are simple (that is a compliment guys) and to the point, and I think I understand them as much as a total stranger may ever know about a person they have never met.  The content of the blogs, and the personal experiences of the bloggers is what really catches my attention.  

So, I say, blog away, and that we must live in the most politically corrupt place on the third planet from the sun.  I just wish we could discuss some other topics and really get to know each other.  After all, we are all neighbors. 

Rich we all know why you had to change your user name, and it was not for the intent to deceive and manipulate.  No one in this thread is talking about you when we're referring to multiple names.  You're the proof though, that a writing style and phraseology comes through regardless of the name.  I recgonized you a few days before I ever said anything.  Initially you denied it, but again, you weren't trying to deceive and manipulate, you were just doing the best you could to deal with an alarming situation.

Islander!  I didn't realize when you had your "meltdown" that what you were trying to say is that you wanted blogs of a more personal nature so you could get to know people.  I agree with you that the blogs are clogged with Politics.  I have tried to bring in other things that would do exactly what you said, allow us to get to know each other better and there just is no interest for the most part.  Why is that?  Would people rather debate then talk, or argue then spend time trying to figure out what makes some people tick?  I'm a big fan of human nature, I love such things but they rarely get any participation. 

Unfortunately I think many people use the blogs as a way to release their anger and anxiety.  What they write about may not be the subject of their anger and angst, it's just the avenue they use to vent it. 

I'm not an angry person and I would be tickled pink to meet my fellow bloggers, y'all can create a mental image of me waving everytime I come here and say something.

I'm hoping as the first anniversary of MCS draws near perhaps there will be some interest in actually meeting in real time for a cup of coffee, or a beer to celebrate the milestone.

Marsha,

I wasn't feeling any guilt.  My original intent to Mike was to let him, or anyone else, know that there can be more than one legitimate reasons for staying anonymous.  I just happened to be able to speak from experience.  I also wanted to let him, & all of you know that none of you were the reason for my maintaining my anonymity.  Yes, there are a # of reasons why someone doesn't want to reveal their real names. Thankfully, peace & quiet has reigned since I've been on the blogs.

Actually, one might even say that it's been too peaceful.  I might have to look around the news & find something controversial to blog @ & then sit back & watch the fireworks before jumping in.  There's always some kind of juicy topic just lurking around the corner.  What do you think? 

RichK

I've sent a couple of emails complaining about the mutliple user names in the last few days.  Jonathan said the site is not set up to prevent such things.  People can lie when they register and there is no way to police that.  Terms of Service Rules is another animal.  Trying to harrass someone and/or invade their privacy like we've seen here recently and repeatedly is against the Terms of Service among other things going on, and I believe they should have a duty to enforce them.  

Rich I enjoy peace, stirring the pot isn't something I enjoy doing unless it's in jest over a trivial matter.  Anonymity and multiple user names are two different issues to me. 

Marsha,

Jonathan is right @ people lieing.  There are ways around the system.  There always are.  Another issue brought up on this thread was having a person edit comments before they are shown on the blog.  I can't see how this can be done in a realistic manner.  Then there are the subjects of financing something like that & who makes the standards & what are they based on.  I can't see justifying the added expenditure of having a person or persons sitting around reading a blog or reply & then either rejuecting it or modifying it.  That's just another whole big barrel of worms we shouldn't have to open.  I guess it comes down to self policing & if it gets worse, MCS taking action.  I hope it doesn't come to that.  As has been stated many times , this is a great venue for communication.  I'd hate to see it go down the tubes because of a couple of numnutz.

RichK 

TruthHurts;

I'll answer you once and once only. I don't know you and from what I have seen I'm not sure I'd want to. Now the feeling may be mutual but that is OK.

There are two old sayings that you might want to keep in mind:

1.  Never argue with an idiot. They will overwhelm you with experience.

2.  Never try to teach a pig to sing. It is a waste of your time, and it irritates the pig.

You and your ilk continue to hijack this space and others for no other reason than to rant and scream at each other like a bunch of 3 year olds.

The antics of the bunch of you border on ignorance and are more than just impolite.

I will not engage in number 1 with you or any of the rest of that whole crew. Unfortunately I think I may have just broken my own rule by engaging in number 2 with you.

For me your apology seems hollow and insincere at best but I would not expect any more than that. So, thanks at least for the attempt but don't bother further on my account.

My favorite means of dealing with people like you and rest of the CCAC bunch is to refuse to acknowledge any future communication.

By the way, you might want to check your ID card to see how to spell your name.

Finder

Well thank you for your kind and candid words. You are very inspirational and have changed my life forever. By your kind words I see you are a persone that says and does excactly what they advise to others. You truly walk the walk.

Iwas sincere, but will not take any time in running in circles with you about the matter.

I wish you good health and Gods speed in all your endeavors.

ps There is another old saying that goes like "to err is human to forgive is devine" Also if I am not mistaken you just called me an idiot and a pig. Well thats ok your just human and replying to something you feel strongly about, kind of like what happened to me. HMMMMMMM

It appears for the moment thats things have calmed down and truth has triumphed over deception.

To all you regular bloggonians my deepiest appologies for subjecting you to my "mean" responses to certain "mean" denegrating remarks made here by some folks with a vindictive personal agenda and spinning the truth to acheive their vindictive goals.

It is my personal expeirence in life that leads me personally, to beleive that sometimes in life when you are dealing with people who do not understand how to be nice and make a point in a reasonable way, that you must be willing to jump into the trenches with them and go hand to hand.

Some people dont understand nice. The more you try to politely make a valid point the uglier and more vindictive they get, and the more lies they spin. I have found this personality trait over and over again in my life, and found that once the bully realizes their tactics dont work and the more they realize when a person is pushed too far they can play the same game, they eventually go away with their tails tucked. The only way a bully can win over on a person is when they have someone they can bully and put down.

It can be argued that one way to deal with it is to simply ingore the person and they will go away all by themselves and this would be a valid argument. In this recent situation I chose to jump into the trenches and confront it head on.

I also am intrested in the human condition and I think we would all agree that there is not one of us here that has not engaged in a trench fight with someone on a topic that is important to them and confronted a bully with the same vigor as did the bully. I pesronally feel that sometimes you have to roll up your sleeves and be willing to get down and dirty, and be willing to get just as ruthless as your enemies to overcome the evil, vindictive, bullies. Most bullies dont understand anything else, they dont hear a word you say or listen to any reason, but when you show them you can get down and dirty and combat them with ruthless thruths you can triumph over them and they simply go away.

So once again I would just like to say to all you regulars that I am deeply sorry that you had to witness all of this recent bantering, and it's my hope that you will forgive my infighting and tatics I used to address those issues.

Thank you all for your understanding

TRUTHHURTS 

I don't think Mike was calling anyone names at all, he was finding humor in a ridiculous situation that has been caused by a group of people who are old enough to know better. 

Personally I have to give him a high five for the laugh.  Thanks Mike!

To get so snippy with him so quickly makes me think you just have a short fuse.  I can imagine when you feel so strongly it's hard to have a long one.

Your points about facing a bully on his own level is well taken with me.  I just don't think this is the place for that.  Here, in a public forum it's better to at least try to take the higher road, and no one with a dog in the fight has done that....not even once.

I accept the apology, thank you. However I still am finished with the situation.  Talk to me about anything else and I will respond if I feel I have anything of value to say. 

I'm with Mike,  enough is enough.

Marsha:

Another blog I write on is so different from MCS.  We all talk about things, almost never of a political nature.  We are planning a get together this June.  When we first planned it the number seemed like 10 or so.  Now, everyone within driving distance seems interested in doing just what you described.  We have people every day or two ask if they are invited, and we say of course you are.  We may have to choose a larger place since the number is getting so large.

By the way, I am sure that MCS logs IP's.  The other forums I use will block more than one user name from the same IP.  My wife and I had to contact them to allow two users on the same IP.  I'm sure MCS software can do the same.  If not block the user, at least let MCS know what the users are doing.  Most other blogs would never allow people to have conversations with themselves. 

Thank you for addressing my remarks marsha. I agree with what you have said. I was merely pointing out maybe in not the best way, that the excact same style of humor used on me by Mike, I used on someone else spinning hate, and when I did so was critisized.

I do not have a short fuse just for the record, I feel I responded with like minded humor. I was not angered in any way as to what Mike said to me, I was just pointing out the intresting parrallels.

Once again Thank you very much, you appear to be a very bright, and nice person.  

TRUTHHURTS

That little tidbit about the IP addresses may make this more manageable then what is appears at first glance, thanks for the info!

I am sure the people who contribute here on a regular basis are from all over the county, it sure would be a way to increase the "feel" of neighbors and community if those who are interested would get together at some point.  Not to discuss issues but just to get to know each other better and have a few laughs. 

I wonder when the very first day of MCS was, I think it's sometime in April.  

It's simply amazing to me that I raise the question of multiple identities and anonymity months ago, and I was burned at the cross by the very people who now support open identity and denounce multiple identities.

Go back and check. I guess it took my burning at the stake for others to evolve to the same realization.

That's the price of an indendent voice, Marsha. Some people forge the trail. Others follow.

Karen, your earlier fiery blogging martyrdom was over a different issue, and I don't know that anyone, mighty or weak, has transcended to that earlier position.

My objections at that time were based on your contention that using one's name lent more credibility to a blogging entry.  I felt your pronouncement was also self-serving, coming just after you announced your own name.  I still don't feel that credibility here at MCS comes from a person's name, but that's really a third issue of this conversation.

It's important to not discuss anonymity and multiple usernames as a single issue.  The reasons for anonymity are many, and should be discussed as its own topic.

Multiple usernamers is a third, unique issue and involves people attempting to manipulate the process. To contribute by more than one username within the same discussion is dishonest, and a pitiful attempt to feign support for one's own position.  If MCS found a way to expose the users who've done that, that would do much more to help me judge credibility than just knowing someone's name.

Michael S. Mann

Thanks for seperating them all, they're all distinctly different situations.  I have no issue with "ficticious" names and never have in general, although I have questioned it in individual situations for varying reasons.  I just never considered one when I signed up, you could call it a lack of imagination, or just a personal desire to be myself because I came here to participate, learn and grow. 

With the "coming out" of several bloggers on the site, I'd say the evidence is leaning more toward substantiating the credibility factor. That is to say, knowing who Mike H, Mike M., and Marsha are predicates my responses to those individuals. I am more apt to answer RichK because I know who he is. It's the "neighborly" thing to do. You speak more often to people you know to sustain and contribute to the relationship. It's more personal. It's a fact of human nature and not necessarily related to this blog site.

And while I do not hold anyone's blogging pseudo-name against them, I have and will continue to encourage people to be open and up front about who they are so that this blog site continues to evolve into a more mature vehicle. I believe that's necessary for sustained growth.

Speaking of growth, it appears to me that only Marsha and other pre-identified bloggers are allowed to learn, change and evolve. Certainly not Karen Lake, per Mike Mann. Otherwise you would not have accused me of expressing my "fiery" martyrdom as part of my coming out party. Quite the narrow gap to skate through Mike, and I'm glad my own personal evolution is not dependent on your approval. I'll express it as best I can whether or not anyone wants to read it. (And you do have a choice, Mike.)

As for duplicity, I have shared many times on the subject and agree with both of you.  I think both of you would be pleasantly surprised to review a list of duplicit users. First, my name isn't on it and second, some of your compatriots are. Unfortunately, MCS risks losing the integrity of the entire site in revealing that information. So, it's something I think we'll have to deal with internally.

I, personally, do not respect when a blogger outright lies about his or her presence at a meeting and then lobbies a softball here on the blog site to get our responses under the veil of a blogging name. If Marsha feels compelled to call out duplicit users, I feel compelled to call out dishonest users. And that's where we are.

I think we all have a sincere desire to share, learn and grow here on MCS. Marsha is not alone in that journey. In my mind, some are being allowed to evolve more gracefully than others, Mike.