Barry, this is like a deja vu moment. You've posted that website at least twice, maybe three times that I can recall. I find Judy's highlighted quotes on their face absolutely hilarious. I really do. This is so passe, as are your constant attempts to cite statistics that prove something. Obviously, the forum determined posting limits were a good idea - they were in place before I got here. I've been booted for a week more than most regular posters here for going over the limit, a few times by accident and also a few times on purpose. They work and I like them and that's the current reality. What are you trying to prove again?
>________________________________ > From: turquoiseb <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 9:47 AM >Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Best article on cyberstalking I've read in quite >some while > > > >--- In [email protected], turquoiseb wrote: >> >> --- In [email protected], turquoiseb wrote: >> > >> > --- In [email protected], Emily Reyn wrote: >> > > >> > > > The article clearly explained that one of the tactics of >> > > > the stalker was obsessive flooding with emails. This >> > > > corresponds directly to some behavior here, as flooding >> > > > with posts can occur here. >> > > >> > > Please, don't be ridiculous...."flooding" up to 50? >> > > Posts in a row is not "obsessive flooding." >> > >> > Emily, don't show your newbie ignorance. The very >> > reason there is a posting limit is BECAUSE of Judy >> > and a couple of other posters, who used to flood >> > this forum with hundreds of posts per month. Between >> > the three of them, they often accumulated over a >> > third of all the posts made to FFL. When asked to >> > stop, and voluntarily cut down on their excessive >> > (and almost always obsessive, in that they were >> > stalking one person or another) posting, they all >> > refused. Rick wisely invented the posting limit, >> > and that is the ONLY reason she posts as little >> > as she does today. >> >> Just as a reminder of the "Bad Old Days," from >> post #121696, back in November, 2006, before >> the posting limits were imposed: >> >> > Total posts: 4672 >> > >> > shempmcgurk -- 541 (11.6%) >> > sparaig -- 533 (11.4%) >> > authfriend -- 482 (10.3%) >> > new.morning -- 265 (5.7%) >> > off_world_beings -- 253 (5.4%) >> > turquoiseb -- 218 (4.7%) >> > >> > Again, the "top three" account for a third >> > of all posts. And again, they'll take no >> > notice of this. So far in November, they >> > account for 47% of all posts made. >> >> Please note that my total was little more than >> we would have today, with the 50-post-per-week >> limit. >> >> Shemp has since left the forum, and when sparaig >> posts, he clearly has his OCD under control now, >> and posts only a reasonable number of comments >> before disappearing again. >> >> Judy has made BY FAR more posts than any other >> person to this forum, approximately 22,650 of >> them, a cumulative average of 8 posts per day >> for 7.7 years. Of those, 7574 (33.4%) mention >> "Barry" OR "Turquoiseb," 2976 (13.1%) mention >> "Vaj," and 2659 (11.7%) mention "Curtis." >> >> Nope, no stalking there. :-) >> >> 2279 of those posts (10%) contain the words "lie" >> OR "liar" OR "lying". It's basically her mantra. :-) > >And let us not forget the "tribute" site created >by one of her stalking victims over on alt. >meditation.transcendental, before she came here >to continue stalking people who had left that >forum. Andrew Skolnick was a prize-winning journalist >who didn't like TM very much, so that meant that Judy >didn't like *him* very much. Andrew chose to reply >to her stalking by preserving *her own words* and >those of a few of her supporters on this website: > >http://www.aaskolnick.com/junkyarddog/ > >Read through a few of her quotes from that pre-FFL >era. See if you find any difference whatsoever >between her tactics and language then, and now. > > > > >
