Until Hendricks and Leboeuf v. Quebec, I was legally barred from commenting on anything.
The problem is that it’s not any specific argument she makes, it’s more a general mode of argumentation, one that asserts the authority of anecdote and personal experience over both the anecdotes and personal experiences of others, and over more general research and broadly-gathered evidence.
I’m not asking her to stop using friends and relatives as data points; we all do that from time to time. I’d simply like, on occasions when contrary evidence is presented, some acknowledgement that her and her husband’s experiences do not constitute the sum total and final word on prison and law enforcement issues.
Well, i can’t speak for anyone else, but my criticism involved no vitriol whatsoever.
Lissa started this thread herself, essentially inviting people to comment on the issue. Hell, her thread title is “Fellow Dopers, A Word if I May.” If this thread hadn’t been opened, i never would have felt the need to comment on the issue. But it was opened, and now i’ve commented, and moved on. I harbor no grudge, and my feelings on this particular issue won’t sour my interactions with Lissa in other threads.
I can think of a bunch of people on these Boards who irritate me on specific topics or issues, but whom i like well enough in general. I’m sure there are people who feel the same about me. It’s not a big deal.
Me too. Lissa is hardly the only poster here who refers to her spouse by a pet name or nickname, and “hubby” is not exactly unheard of or overly precious. I don’t keep very good track of who posts what, where, but every now and then I will read a post by someone and think, “oh yeah, that one’s a lawyer” or “yeah, I think I remember this person said something about that before.”
Lissa certainly has more knowledge of the prison system than I do, so I would tend to take her word on something involving that. Should someone come along and say “oh no, you’re wrong because this case is in the UK and the law there is different in this way” that should be enough.
I do not have personal knowledge of finance or aviation or computers, but if someone asks about these things, I CAN ask experts I know and reply with their information. I don’t see why other people can’t do that, too.
Oaky, as others have requested I went back and reread the linked post.
Short version: Lissa’s right and the rest of you are wrong.
But I imagine you’re going to want more details. No, that’s not true - I doubt any of you want to read more about what I have to say at this point. However, I’m going to go on anyway as others have already offered their views on what was said.
A thread was started by chowder on a terrible crime.
Lissa was the first poster to respond. Admittedly, her first response was to question the physical possibility of having sex with a child that small. She was in error in her opinion but there was no mention of prison or her husband in her post.
Zabali Clawbane responded to Lissa in Post 4. Zabali wrote that Lissa’s husband works in a prison and implied Lissa might have some knowledge of the issue being discussed because of this.
Lissa responded to Zabali in Post 8. She specifically said that her husband’s occupation gave her no special experience regarding this issue.
Chowder in Post 12 and Zabali in Post 13 raised the issue of sentencing policies.
Lissa commented on sentencing policies in Post 14. She didn’t say anything about her husband, his job, or any special knowledge, nor did she indicate that she had any special authority on this subject.
El Cid Viscoso asked for a cite to part of what Lissa said in Post 15.
Zabali pointed out that Lissa was talking about American sentencing policies and the event occurred in the UK in Post 17. This post was made at 2:05 pm.
Lissa responded to El Cid’s post by offering cites for what she had said with links in Post 18. Lissa made no mention of her or her husband’s personal experience. This post was made at 2:30 pm. This post made no mention of Zabali’s post and I would guess* that Lissa was writing her response to El Cid at this time and had not seen Zabali’s post yet.
- Yes, I am guessing here. But it seems reasonable that Lissa spent at least twenty five minutes preparing her post which was lengthy and, as per El Cid’s request, had linked cites.
Lissa posted another post at 2:31 pm. This one responded to Zabali’s most recent post. Lissa wrote: “You’re quite right. I know nothing about the UK or Austrailia’s prison systems. I apologize if anyone was confused.”
El Cid responded to Lissa with a comment that could be interpreted as being sarcastic (“Kiiinda my point.”) in Post 21. Lissa appeared to have gone to some effort to answer El Cid’s question but he seemed to be more focused on her admission that she had misunderstood a different point.
Veuve_ClicquotNJ implies that child abusers are routinely raped in prison in Post 30.
Pizzabrat asks in crimes like this were called “child murder” in the past in Post 32.
Lissa responds to Pizzabrat’s post and expresses her opinion on the subject in Post 35. No mention of her husband’s job.
Lissa responds to Veuve’s post in Post 36. She states that forcible rape is less common in prison than most people believe. And she states that child abusers are not routinely targets in prison. She acknowledges that this situation is different in women’s prisons. She does not mention her husband or his occupation.
Rancloth responds to Zabali’s Post 14 and discusses sentencing policies in California in Post 41. Nobody comments on the fact that Rancloth is discussing American sentencing policies.
Seven quotes Lissa’s Post 36 and asks: “You know this because . . . ?” in Post 42.
Lissa responds to Seven in Post 43. She links to a cite discussing prison rape in the UK. She makes no mention of her husband or his occupation.
Seven responds to Lissa in Post 44. Seven disagrees with Lissa and offers cites to support his position. Seven alleges that prison guards frequently commit rape and concludes by writing: “So yes. Getting stats on prison rape will be hard when it’s the guards doing some of the raping. Of course the guards take is seriously. Can I suggest something? Don’t let this thread turn into another short novel of you taking out of your ass and everyone else handing it to you. You really need to just stay out of these threads and admit you aren’t the knowledge base of all things prisons. My wife is a nurse. That doesn’t mean I’m an authority in threads related to delivering babies and starting IVs.”
Lissa responds to Seven in Post 45. She explains why she disagrees with the statistics he provided. She makes no personal comments about Seven. She responds to his personal comments about her by writing: “I never claimed to be an expert. However, I do a lot of reading on this subject, and I think I have some useful knowledge to contribute.”
Seven responds in Post 46: "Great. Everyone needs a fetish. If reading about prison rape is yours, more power to you. The problem is, like early in this thread, or this three page train-wreck, your “useful knowledge” doesn’t always apply. Do us a favour and for just 30 days avoid posting in threads where you begin with “my hubby works in a prison and…”
Lissa responds to Seven in Post 47: “Why be so mean about it? I haven’t been mean to you. It’s not a fetish-- I’m fascinated by human social sturcture and the one that develops inisde of prisons is very interesting to me.”
Lisacurl posts to Lissa in Post 48. She says Lissa should use cites for her opinions and not refer to her husband’s occupation in her posts on prison issues. As noted above, Lisa has used cites and has not mentioned her husband’s occupation except once in direct reponse to another poster’s previous reference about it.
Wring posts to Lissa in Post 49. She writes “you merely wandered into yet another crime/police/prison thread and made unfound assertions with that same air of “I know” that accompanies many of your posts t hat folks poke at.”. She talks about Lissa’s Post 18 and says “fuck”. She disagrees with Lissa’s stated opinions on prison rape but offers nothing to support her position except that it’s what she believes is true.
Zabali posts to Lissa in Post 50. She says Lissa mentioned her husband and the fact that he worked in prison (it was in fact Zabali herself who mentioned this). Zabali then says Lissa was wrong because the incident happened in the UK not the US. She quotes where Lissa acknowledged this mistake and apologized for it. But then she goes on to say: “You really should have dropped it right there. Instead you continued on. I don’t think you realize how irritating it is to others when you do that.” In fact, Lissa did not raise the subject again after her apology. Zabali continued with: “It’s better to let it be and let people cool off and grumble a bit, instead of jumping right back in on a slightly different tangent that has to do with your accumulated knowledge of how American prison’s work. With all due respect, I know it’s hard for you to resist, but please do work on it?” However, the only comments Lissa made after this point was to answer questions and discuss issues other people had previously raised.
Lissa answers some of the specific allegations made towards her in Post 51. She ignores the personal comments made about her.
Wring responds with more personal attacks in Post 52.
Lissa answers Wring’s personal attacks in Post 52 with: “And I look forward to hearing their perspectives on it. This is a very interesting subject.”
Alice_in_wonderland posts in Post 53: “Lissa - it’s really fucking obnoxious and teeth-gratingly annoying when you post about prision shit, particularly when you cite your husband as your source, even when you’re correct. There - is that clear enough?”
Lissa is amazingly still polite at this point and responds in Post 54: “Yes, and I respect that opinion and beg you to confirm that in this thread I never once did so because of that exact same sentiment expressed earlier.”
Alice responds in Post 55: “No, you talked about prison shit all over the place. Prison shit which has no bearing on the OP, whatsoever. Just because you didn’t cite your hubby this time makes it no less annoying.”
Casdave talks about his knowledge of the incident in Post 59.
Lissa thanks Casdave’s for his post in Post 62.
Jodi apparently refers to Lissa in Post 65 by writing to Casdave: “you don’t post like The Last Word on the subject; you’re too low-key.”
And that’s everything. Every post made by Lissa or about Lissa or otherwise relevant to this discussion.
As I said before, Lissa was right and the rest of you were wrong. She never mentioned her husband or his job except once in direct response to another poster asking about it and her response was to specifically state his experience was not relevant here. She was right most of the time and when she made a mistake - and in fact, what she said was not wrong as much as it was irrelevant to the topic under discussion - she acknowledged it and apologized for it regardless. She responded to topics other people raised, answered questions other people asked, and provided cites when requested. When other people disagreed with her, she explained why she took the positions that she did. And she was polite throughout which was more than any of the people who abused her by ambushing her, making false accusations against her, and ganging up on her can say. But I don’t imagine any of you will follow her example with an acknowledgment of your error and an apology.
Little Nemo - that was a nice thing to do.
Which is all fine, but do you present the information as The Final And Only Word? Which is, whether she intends it or not, the tone that too often infests Lissa’s posts.
At times here on the SDMB I comment on legal matters. Based on what font of knowledge? This: 1972-1980, cite-checker and copy editor of appellate briefs for a legal printing company. 1980-1987, decision editor for state regulatory agency. 1987 - current, proofreader of deposition, trial, conference, and regulatory hearing transcripts for court reporters. I have in essence been reading law for 35 years, in every segment of the field. I read more deposition transcripts in a month than many lawyers encounter in their careers. I know way more about the law, the legal system, and so forth than most laypeople.
So how does all that specialized knowledge get presented? When a legal-related question arises, I’ve often got plenty of informed contributions to offer. But such posts will always be begun with wording along the lines of: “As I understand it… Given this previous experience… It’s my impression…” followed by the tidbit of information and explanation of its source, and ending with something like, “Or so I understand; you lawyers out there, feel free to correct me.” No flat-out tone of that THIS is the one and only answer; no stubborn insistence that I’m right when faced with contradiction from people who really are experts in the field.
If Lissa spoke with similar humility and willingness to concede the point to first-hand authority she wouldn’t be getting all this flak.* Instead, her posts in law-enforcement-related threads too often read like the official report of the High Commission on Such-And-So.
On preview: Little Nemo, did you bother to read any of the links in this thread to previous threads where Lissa has trotted out hubby and refused to admit that someone like Jodi, with firsthand experience, could possibly be right and Lissa wrong? We’re not talking about one thread, we’re talking about a longstanding history. As you would know if you’d spent less time parsing that one thread and examined all the evidence presented. Which lisacurl has already pointed out to you.
*Nota bene: Not to be confused with flack. 
You know, I very rarely get into it with other posters. (Go ahead, look up my post history.) And what I know of you, I don’t recall anything distasteful or unlikeable. But to suggest that Lissa has some responsiibility to present her information and/or opinion more humbly, or that one must offer up one’s resume to provide such information or opinion, is, in MY opinion, EXACTLY what she’s complaining of in the OP, and it IS unfair.
Why on EARTH should she be held to a different standard than someone else? Even IF she were a talking-out-her-ass know-it-all, she is hardly the only person on the SDMB who has done that. If people are upset with her, the correct response is to pit her - not to go into every thread she’s posting in and say “LOOK SHE’S DOING IT AGAIN!” and attacking her there (and derailing the fuck out of those threads in the process, I might add.)
Little Nemo, that was a noble if misplaced parse fest. Would more than 40 posters, many of whom were very nice for the Pit, post contrary to you for no reason?
Especially to Lissa, who is not known to be a “crazy mean bitch from hell” poster?
It is just one exceedingly irritating point Lissa is being taken to task for. Perhaps you should read a bit more…
Godammit LifeOnWry, Lissa has been posting this “Hubby says this and Hubby says that and I know from hanging out with Hubby and cops and shit, so what I say is RIGHT” crap for years.
She finally got called bigtime by Jodi, who IS a professional, and got her butt kicked, then posted this waaah thread. So some people are a bit irritated. Stop the “held to a different standard” crap.
I’m thinking that perhaps what EddyTeddyFreddy and others are asking is that she SHOULD hold herself to the standard that everyone else holds themselves to (or are held to by others). That standard tends to be “I read in this article that …” or “in his last book, Some Guy said that …” or somesuch. Or even “I seem to remember reading…” or “I thought I saw somewhere …”
State uncommon facts without attribution, and you’re liable to be asked where you got the information. That goes for everyone…it’s not special treatment. Presenting facts in a manner that suggests you know how it is or that places you inside the action, when in fact you only have secondhand knowledge, and you’re liable to get smacked down. That goes for everyone.
To add to ETF’s point…I have from time to time tried to contribute to journalism threads. I have attended two fairly well-respected journalism schools, worked on their papers, which are considered among the best in the country, and also worked at “real” (as opposed to college) newspapers with circulations ranging from in the thousands to nearly a half-million. I know very little of the sum total knowledge about journalism, and I certainly hope I never give the impression that I know how “it is.” There are people here who have worked in the field in different capacities than I have, and probably in the same one but higher-ranking. I only know what I know from my experience, and my opinions on related topics spring from there as well. I will gladly provide my knowledge and opinions, but I hope to always couch it not in “this is how it is done,” but “this is how it has been done in my experience.”
And it will have been my experience. Not my hubby’s.
Apparently if Lissa just says what she knows, she’s acting like an authority without explaining where she got her experience. But she’s also not supposed to explain where she got her experience, because people accuse her of always doing that.
And no, I didn’t go back and read every post Lissa ever wrote or ever had written about her. I did, as others suggested, read the thread linked in the OP. As I wrote, people were accusing her of doing things - in that thread - which she was not doing. So unless those people can now demonstrate why I should believe that particular thread was somehow atypical and was the only time they made unfounded accusations against Lissa, I’ll assume it was a fair example of their behavior in other cases.
As I said above, I know a lot about prison issues from personal experience. I’ve read many things Lissa has written about prison issues and I generally agree with what she wrote. It’s possible that Lissa and I actually know more about prison issues than some other people do.
Lissa, it’s been my experience that you tend to have an overly-contentious, hostile, and condescending attitude in your posts. Perhaps you should be looking inward rather than casting blame outwards.
Lissa I appreciate your unique perspective and the life experience of your Husband. You are a Source.
(but sometimes you do speak a tiny bit too authoritively. Of course so do I 
)
I meant it’s a different thread from the OP, and is what started this shitstorm.
You are such a goddamn mean whore. It isn’t just that you delight in knocking people down. No, that requires more courage than you can muster. You’re just a middle rat in the rat patrol, and you only poke your head into the room when you’re sure that other rats have chased the cat away. You scour the Pit for threads where people you don’t like are being beaten up. And then you preen your rat head and write your rat snark and laugh at your rat cleverness. You murder with words. It’s beyond schadenfreude. Misfortune isn’t enough for you. You’re like Brutus stabbing Caesar. You wait until others have done the job, and then you sneak through the crowd to plunge your blade into his belly where the body is softest because you don’t have the strength to stab through a rib. Then you masturbate while you listen to the death rattle. Thank god your seed is wasted.
I personally like to hear the perspective of someone “in the field.” But **Lissa **always posts about her husband. I’d rather know what she does, to tell you the truth. It’s like she views the world vicariousloy through him. And even if HE were to post, as a CA prision guard, I’d have to take everything with a grain a salt. If I were a guard on the take I’d probably try to paint the best picture to my wife. (This is not in ANY way trying to taint Lissa’s viewpoints.) I’ve known quite a few guys who spent time at Donovan, and whatever the guards say, there’s something else going on in the penn. Drugs and cell phones smuggled in by guards. If you work in a maximum unit, you don’t have that much to do to protect yourself. But these are the guys (and gals) in CA who get really high wages, much more than teachers. Think about it: you get paid more to demean someone than to educate a kid. That’s really sad; and that’s Kalifornian, as Arnold would say.
Ooh, mean Lib is out now. You are funny, dude.
Damn, you sound like Dean Koontz in your self righteous anger.
Thank you, thank you! 
I’ll be here until I can no lon