On 07/29/2011 03:44 PM, Vaj wrote: > On Jul 29, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: > >> How can it be considered covering up, when there's nothing the least bit >> secretive about deleting posts? Admins have a bit more specific info about >> deletions, but anybody can see that deletions occurred, and anybody can look >> at the alternate archive and figure out what was deleted. It makes no sense >> to accuse Judy of trying to hide her overposting when there's simply no >> possible way to hide the overposting or the deletions. There's also the fact >> that she emailed me to tell me what had happened. I see no dishonesty or >> deception in any of her actions. > > Judy has over-posted on numerous occasions. When she doesn't, she posts out > at exactly 50 posts - as if she was totally obsessed with posting. > > In fact, the reason posting limits were set was BECAUSE OF JUDY (and Lawson). > SO the entire list has been held hostage because of these two posters. But > really, Judy is the main culprit. Lawson had his own issues and has worked on > them to the point where he seems to have those compulsions under control. > > I myself routinely underpost. > > But on the occasions where I have just lightly over-posted by Yahoo! not > sending a post or two or three to me, I was immediately banned, despite any > protest. > > At this point, since public flogging is no longer in fashion, I think Judy > should be both banned and flogged on YouTube.
And we know what will happen if she is forgiven: from then on Rick and Alex will be bugged by people who "accidentally" overpost.
