I plead youth and inexperience, plus long and faithful service.
FWIW, I didn’t particularly want to talk to anyone; I posted my name and address in an effort to deflect the obvious criticism that somehow Mikey was being singled out for attention.
I wasn’t too worried about it. My name and address could easily be discovered, anyway, by anyone with a browser, my last name and home town, and two minutes worth of curiosity.
I hope nothing I’ve done seems rancorous; I am not in the least upset with Mikey - or, indeed, anyone. (Well, with Clinton, but that’s hardly relevant here).
In view of the neutral corner admonition, I hesitate to bring this up… but what should we conclude? That Mikey, a legitimate poster hobbled with a problem explaining himself, was hounded out by yours truly? If this is so, I am very sorry…
Another explanation is that Mikey’s post was false, and his efforts to cover that up only dug his hole deeper, and faced with outright exposure, he bailed out.
I express no opinion as to which, if either, of those are correct.
I am now torn between finishing up that last bit of investigation tomorrow… or just letting it go.
Heh heh heh… I did that on purpose… kinda illustrates the point, doesn’t it?
I also thought that finishing the whole story would distract from my point, which was of course that I can’t leave a thread hanging without unravelling.
But – in the interest of fairness and justice…
While the crew retraces their path back through space, trying to figure out what has happened, Picard countermands his earlier order to Data (which, of course, he has no recollection of making in the first place) and Data reveals the real story.
Far from all falling unconscious, the crew passed the point in space without incident, cruised for a day, only to stumble upon a planetary system inhabited by incredibly private, powerful, and paranoid people. Upset that their Walden has been discovered, they zap themselves on to the bridge, temporarily taking over Troi’s body. Worf attempts to subdue the possessed Troi, and is thrown across the bridge, breaking his arm.
The Paranoid Planet folks solemnly explain that since the crew of the Enterprise knows their secret, the Enterprise must be destroyed. In a desparate gamble, Picard convinces them to take a less extreme course: use their superior powers to erase everyone’s memory of the discovery. They point out that even were they to do so, they cannot affect computer memory. Picard promises that the crew can wipe all the computer logs as well. The PP folks ask about Data, and Picard then orders Data to assist in the computer deletion and hoax, and never let them know the truth.
By the time the tale is spun, the ship has arrived back at the Paranoid People Planet, and the spirit takes over Troi again, sadly informing them that obviously Picard’s plan was faulty, and that this time, they will have to destroy the ship.
Picard comes through again. “No, no,” he says. “The reason this failed was that too many clues were left: Worf’s arm, the computer, the flower. And we humans love a good mystery. We can’t help searching for clues. So… consider this time a…a… rehearsal. Now, we’ll know what to guard against.”
The last scene of the show is the crew coming out of unconsciousness - execpt for Data. Picard looks blearily at Data.
“How long were we out, Mr. Data?”
“About thirty seconds, sir,” replies Data with a straight face.
It’s a great episode… only one of about five I’ve ever seen, but I remember it fondly.
Read psycat90’s post (about 10 up) with Mikey’s quotes about how the kids testified in the first days of trial in a case only filed 8 days ago.
I believe that WW is a Boy Scout advisor for the Law badge. I believe he is Mikey’s advisor. Read Mikey’s repeated requests for people to come to Joni’s defense. That’s his job in the mock trial they’re holding.
::shaking head::
Don’t go there. This board has jumped from virtual discussion to potential IRL consequences far too often in recent days.
This episode is over.
Sue from El Paso
Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.
If someone is, for all intents and purposes, not someone’s parent, then they should not have to support that person.
So, do you think that every woman that has ever given up a child for adoption, or would even consider such a thing, should be sterilized? Or can women renounce their responsibilities to their children, and men can’t? The children have been de facto adopted by Arnold. Why should a guy have to pay child support for children then have been adopted by another man? Either Jeff gets custody (or at the very least, recognition as their father), or Jeff doesn’t owe anything. I don’t see how Jeff can have all the responsibilities of fatherhood with none of the privilidges (like having your kids call you “Dad”).
BTW, it’s not like Jeff is dumping them on the street. He’s leaving them in a two parent household. Why are these children entitled to have three parents?
Didn’t someone mention the Department of Redundancy Department before this? ANY posting by the infamous FA or his/her/its alternate “personalities” is, de facto, BS.
Monty, are you saying we should not let non-adults be members and post here? (Good thing Ben’s not here – I can just hear him: “AGEIST!”
I don’t think I like SUCH a broad prohibition. Eldest Son does lurk here, and has posted very occasionally (as he did on the old board). He gives 14 year olds a MUCH better name than some of the drivel we’ve seen here lately. (Middle Son and Youngest Son are registered too, although they don’t hang here – it was more a question that I wanted to reserve those names for them since that’s how I identify them in my posts.)
As for the felonies question? Mmmm, maybe not, depending on what kind of case it was, and whether identifying information was redacted. I work almost exclusively in civil courts, where this is not an issue, so I’m not closely familiar with what restrictions there are in criminal or family courts.
<-- AKA GigoloBoy member since 06/01/99, with 0 posts till now.
Just so you all know Mikeylikesit is gone and it was because of the SDMB board users who threatened him and his fiancee last night. I think DavidB can confirm this if anyone has questions.
John John and I both received emails from Mike before he cancelled. I think we all crossed the line in calling his employers and family people. Shame on all of us for allowing that.
MikeylikesIT
unregistered posted 01-11-2000 06:49 PM
Lets see, you contacted my employers to verify my position and credentials. Then you contact my friends and their employers, when I reference them. Then you have the nerve to call my home after finding my number, and leave profane messages?!?!!?
then this came:
David B
Moderator posted 01-11-2000 10:03 PM
[Moderator Hat: ON]
Ok, folks, it’s over. Mikey has requested that the administration remove his registration here, and they are doing so. He also requested that all messages he wrote be deleted, but we will not be doing that as it would interrupt too many threads.
David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator
[Moderator Hat: OFF]
After talking to a few of my fellow board semi-longtimers I think Mikey was legitimate and was just eneducated as to board “tact”. So in the future lets give someone more of a chance before starting a “roast”.
Precisely who do you allege called his employer or his family?
Speaking for myself, I have made exactly two calls: both to the Sacramento District Attorney’s office. The total of those calls was less than three minutes. Neither of the people I spoke to were upset by my call, so far as I could discern.
Mikey does not work for the DA’s office. He claimed Walter Wunderlich did. As I discovered, Walter Wunderlich did not.
So, again: Precisely who do you allege called his employer or his family?
Breathe easy it wasnt you.But I did notice what you said to the newbie (Captain Ed) and you werent correct in your assumptions. But the some of us know who did make the threats. Since the administrators have asked us to drop the issue, I will.
So lets all be a lot more decent around here.
Gig: here’s a news flash foryou: it wasn’t anybody. The whole thing about the threats, etc., was exactly as true as the OP. I.e., NOT AT ALL!
Here’s another thing: it’s legitimate to verify references. Don’t want it verified? Don’t reference it. Making the entire thing up doesn’t seem to work so well, does it? I certainly hope that FA/Mikey/Whatever will take this lesson into high school when he/she/it/whatever actually does go to school. My teachers were pretty tough on folks who falsified references in coursework.
Davidcan verify that Mikey received threats from SDMB members?
I want that verification. ASAP.
If there’s none forthcoming, then AFAIC, good riddance. He’s happier without subjecting himself to our “abuse” and we’re infinitely better off without his whining martyr complex.
True. For which I was and am sorry. But – I did the same thing I did with Mikey – I asked for verification and references. With Capt. Ed, I got them, and checked them, and he was solid. So I put hat in hand and announced, immediately and publically, that I was wrong.
I should have asked first, not accused first. But that episode doesn’t invalidate the process of verifying any contested facts – if anything, it supports it.
