--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > M2, you're on campus, right? Heard anything about any > > > > suicides? I haven't, and there hasn't been anything > > > > in the papers either. Would definitely be front-page > > > > news in a town this size. > > > > > > I think this rumor may have been started by > > > Knapp on his blog: > > > > > > Sad News: Possible MUM Suicide > > > > > > Posted by John M. Knapp, LMSW at 1/19/2007 10:36:00 AM > > > > Doug's post to FFL containing the rumor is dated earlier > > than that blog entry: > > > > Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:42 am > > > > I'm more inclined to believe he reposted on his blog the > > rumor he read on FFL. > > I noticed this, too, just as I did my research > after reading the first mention of the rumor > here by searching the online version of the > Fairfield Ledger. I couldn't find anything there > or on Google or in any of the neighboring Iowa > papers, so I chalked it up as a rumor, and didn't > bother to comment on it here. Especially because > a few others had already done so, asking for > validation of the rumor. > > Compare and contrast to (what appears to be) John > Knapp reading the rumor here, wanting to believe > it were true and thus *not* doing his research, > and printing it on his blog as truth. > > Also compare and contrast to one person here,
Barry, why do you occasionally become afraid of mentioning my name? > reading John Knapp's blog and finding his version > of the rumor, wanting to believe it was the source > and thus *not* doing her research by checking the > timestamps, and starting her own rumor that John > was the original source of the first rumor. Timestamps, of course, may or may not tell the whole story about who started a rumor when. There *are* other means of communication than via public postings to the Web. Starting rumors is one of John Knapp's specialties, as Barry must remember from Knapp's earlier glory days. He can be quite clever about it too: he's entirely capable of making "inquiries" to certain Fairfield residents he knows post here in the hope that they'll say something about it, then once they've done so, repeating the rumor on his blog as if it hadn't come from him in the first place. Whether that's what happened in this case is still murky, but then I made it clear I was speculating about Knapp having started it. > It seems to me that in both of those cases what > is going on is a person who 1) has an agenda, > and 2) is willing to forward or start rumors > that *further* that agenda, without bothering > to verify their validity. Actually I also checked the Fairfield papers before I posted. > Fanatics "against," fanatics "for." Same modus > operandi. You certainly could say I have an agenda where John Knapp is concerned: to let those who have never had any experience with him know (as Barry does as well) that they shouldn't take anything he says at face value.
