Whoops. I leave work and go eat, and suddenly my thread is a two-pager. Apologies.
Anyway, it honestly wasn’t that journal. Ya’ll can believe me or not. If you can find the cache of that journal, feel free, but I’m not giving it out because it was my rant journal. There’s stuff there about people I know in real life, people I know on the Internet, politicos, and even a few Dopers. I honestly don’t care if you believe me or not.
Secondly: I don’t care who wins the thread. Although I second the nomination for the person who utterly owned me by finding my real LJ. That was pretty badass, dude.
Anyway, the “I’m so nervous” comment from that blog was because I was hours away from getting married. The entire week before that post was me babbling senselessly about the wedding. The post, if you guys read the ones previously, was me saying “I’m not nearly as nervous because I’m mad now!” But I did edit it because the comment I made on the other journal was relatively mundane; that one was downright threatening. My only defense is temporary insanity of some sort.
And yay! My own pitting! If I were a troll this’d be the happiest day of my life. The only step up would be getting snarked again.
You honestly think Homeland Security wasn’t aware of the other journal with the “bitch is lucky I didn’t have a gun” comment on it? If a couple of Dopers could find it, I’m pretty sure Homeland Security did, too. If they didn’t mention it to you, I suspect they were purposely withholding that information.
Thanks, Duke of Rat. After a couple years of lurking, I’m not sure I’ll have much else to say; we’ll see how the next 30 go.
As a couple others have already said, tashabot; your real life name is all over your livejournal, with references to real life events which make it pretty clear who you are. It took me less than two minutes on Google to find that quote with nothing more than your SD user name and location, and I was just curious about what you might’ve actually said on your LJ. I wouldn’t think for a minute Homeland Security investigating a perceived threat to a high-profile political figure didn’t find that - and probably a lot more - before they interrupted your life. I don’t want to beat a dead horse here, but be careful what you say and even more careful what you commit to print, whether you think it’s public or not.
Meh. At the behest of the Canadian government, the RCMP investigated me as a potential national security risk in 1983. Unknown to me until later, there were vists to and interviews with neighbours and others, fingerprints taken, and so on. Since it’s happened in Canada before, and likely to many more people than just me, I have to wonder how you define “a genuinely free nation.”
Yow! Home Scurty went as far into tasha’s life as they admitted to her, so it’s safe to assume they’re keeping an eye on this thread as well. That means I have an opportunity to send a message the Attorney General.
“Hello, Al. Mrs. Gonzales want you to stop at the grocery after work. Bring home a loaf of whole grain bread and a case of Dos Equis.”
Listen, he’s not going to know that’s a coded message if you don’t include the quotation marks:
Hello, Al. “Mrs. Gonzales” wants you to stop at the “grocery” after work. Bring home a loaf of “whole grain bread” and a case of “Dos Equis”. The black bird flies alone.
I have no knowledge of the laws of Florida but this sounds very bogus. Not saying you are lying, they may just have been lazy. This is the law in NJ:
If the threats do not rise to this level (such as “I’m gonna kick your ass!”) then it would drop to the level of harassment but still a crime. I find it hard to believe that Florida does not have similar laws. If the cops didn’t have probable cause to arrest (they didn’t see it) then you should have been able to sign the complaints.
I’m guessing (hoping?) it was hyperbole - it doesn’t take much thought to realize that Canada is not, and can not, be a “genuinely free nation.” Wouldn’t a “genuinely free nation” be a complete anarchy?
a35362, that’s what I was going to say! As far as I know, women are actually the major gender.
Electronic communications are discoverable in court; a company is required to keep records of their emails, etc. just like they are required to keep records of paper documents (with extremely hefty fines for misplaced records that a court wants to see). Just because it’s electronic doesn’t mean it isn’t subject to legal rules.
And journalists being objective is pretty much a joke, but I guess they want to retain the appearance of objectivity.
Dangit, missed the edit window. I also wanted to say that I have a mental image of Homeland Security frantically googling every day to find all the stuff they need. And now I have a mental image of the Snake Pit on “24” frantically googling to find all the stuff they need (“Hold on, Jack, the internet connection is a little slow right now; dammit, should have hit “I’m feeling lucky”…”)
Another poster has pointed out to me that Guests don’t have private message privileges, so if you want to take me up on the offer, just make a post in the “About This Message Board” forum and we’ll go from there.
You know another thing is they may not be used to internet acronyms. They read, “I’m still nervous, but I’m totally calmed down with hatred, laughing out loud!” They got an image in their minds of you doing just that. I’d’ve sent in the SWAT team.
I could honestly go on all day about certain aspects that are mentioned here in this thread. I’m choosing to only state one though. Here goes;
When your viewpoints and your thoughts are public domain because you’re a journalist, it’s very important that you use a certain level of decorum on the blogs and places you post frequently. Personally, when I became a journalist (Mind you, I’m not print media – all of my work is done here on “Teh Internetz”.) I kind of threw out the whole, “Well, I can say whatever I want because it’s freedom of speech and blahblahblah.” because your viewpoints can’t become intertwined with the news you’re posting.
If you think that you’re ever too good for having to censor some of your more militant views because you’re a journalist, then you shouldn’t be a journalist. I would’ve said that no matter who this person was.
