Per James, Jamie's post is "all made up." More libel, Harry. Jamie, if you knew about this terrifying aspect of James's personality, why did you try so hard by sending him singing telegrams to get him back? Why would you do that for someone who did terrible stuff to you?
Presby--not that I need to justify my eBay listings to you, or anyone else, take a look at the definition of "rare." This doll could actually be described as "UNIQUE," and not simply rare, which means "not in unusually large numbers." Each doll is handmade, hand-carved, and different from the rest, to the best of my knowledge. They are traditionally carved by fathers to give as gifts to their daughters. This doll is unique, and therefore, rare. You will not find another exactly like it.
Also, as you know, collectibles once owned by famous people are more valuable than the same item owned by ordinary people. A guitar owned by Elvis is much more than the same guitar owned by me. This doll is in PRISTINE condition, and was once owned by F, increasing its value. I have seen similar dolls (although none exactly like it, for no two are the same) sell at auction for over $600. This one, being in better condition, and once owned by F, makes it more valuable, in my opinion. Your opinion might be different.
Harry, I'd start going through every single thread. I'm finding a TON of violations, just by Ricky alone!
You see, Harry, I'm sticking up for EVERYONE you and your crew have libeled, defamed, harassed, profaned, and otherwise hated. There are so many individual comments on so many individual threads that it will take the investigative team at tapatalk a while to see them all. But I'll make sure they do. Because we are sick and tired of your site's blatant hateful comments and lies and defamation. We are sick and tired of you guys trolling CC and cyberstalking me and others. It's not just about me. It's about your WHOLE site. The whole site is filled with stuff like Ricky's profanity and homophobic CRAP. It's plain old WRONG. And Presby, you freaking idiot. You prodded Ricky on with the post below--you ENCOURAGED it. So you can just take your sanctimonious, self-righteous crap and just it back up your butt. You CHEERED Ricky's homophobic rant. Shame on you!
Like this one, that violates:
-No profanity
-No racism, bigotry
-No personal attacks
-No offensive, vulgar comments
-No multiple accounts
Update Four:
I have also given Tapatalk the web address of my blog. I do call you haters, because your forum is full of nasty remarks that are in direct violation of Tapatalk's tos and code of conduct. I have also given Tapatalk photos of original posts before they were deleted or changed. Simple point is that this is that you and many members on Harry's have cybserstalked, libeled, and posted false and defamatory statements about me since day one, which is against their terms of service and code of conduct.
I am not "anonymous" on my blog. However, deflecting blame does not excuse you or other members of Harry's blog from violating their tos and code of conduct.
Update Three:
Harry, Terms of Service goes along with Code of Conduct. They can shut you down for violoating either. Defamatory comments are ALL OVER your blog, right along with the libel. Read the CODE OF CONDUCT, too. You are ALSO responsible for that in addition to the terms of service. You are KNOWINGLY in violation because when you signed up to have a blog, you signed that you had read and agreed to the terms of service, code of conduct, etc. so yeah, you have knowingly allowed such content on your site, and are only now, under threat of shut down, deleting posts I've been concerned about for the past few days. You willingly participated in hateful speech throughout. I took screenshots of every single one, and they will be in Tapatalk's hands within about ten minutes or so.
Rooster, I did not know you kept the second pic up when you said you deleted the pic. I thought you deleted both.
HARRY, if you admit you cannot tell what is truth between jamie and me, it is YOUR responsibility as the owner of the forum to delete or ban people who violate the code of conduct. I suggest you read the code of conduct very carefully and delete ALL questionable comments. Like ones about my so called "bisexuality, " and "extramarital" affairs. All comments that violate code of conduct on every thread need to come down.
mdavis, you know I never filed a restraining order. Go back and read stuff again. I filed a police report...NEVER did I say anything about a restraining order.
Harry, I added some stuff in update two you might want to read. I think the time has come to shut down Harry's site. They are clearly in violation of almost every single one of the terms of service and codes of conduct.
If you want to take a stand against hate in the chase, email support@tapatalk.com and link this thread, along with any other thread that violates such rules as
--No personal attacks.
--No forum wars.
--No cyberstalking.
--No forum gangs.
--No disrespectful content.
--No offensive, vulgar, or pornographic content.
--No profanity.
--No solicitation or recruitment of members (mdavis in huge violation)
Link to attach to a violation complaint:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/chase/loon-delusions-t912.html
And NO, Rooster, I said I was not okay with ANY of the content. I was not okay with the second pic...see update below.
Update Two:
Harry, your forum, and specifically, at this time, the thread about me, violates the forum's code of conduct (see end of update 1). I request the entire thread be deleted and a stern warning sent to those who have violated the terms of use and code of conduct. Thank you for getting Rooster to delete the pic. But, according to the code of conduct, the entire thread is in violation, so please delete. I do not perceive any of it as "poking fun," and most definitely perceive it as a continued personal attack.
Also, Harry, it's not up to me to inform you of what's libelous. I've informed you for two days that the posts were libelous. It's up to YOU to moderate your site and make sure your users conform to Tapatalk's code of conduct. When you see a post that violates, delete it. Thanks.
Update: Jamie, you are a flat out liar. I don't know where you're getting the three way nonsense from--probably out of your crazy fantasies. And I never accused you of peeking through windows, and I have never even hinted at a restraining order of any kind. Why in the world do you feel the need to add to your story? You're a flat out liar, making up stuff as you go along. Wow, and even Presby is starting to see the psycho that constitutes the entirety of you. Jamie, if they want the truth, I can back up everything I've said with PROOF. What do you have but a mouth that adds more lies to an already lie-filled story on your end. I can get a copy of the police report. I can provide the world with every single text sent between you and I. You've got absolutely nothing to back up your stupid claims.
Presby, you must be looking at a different law dictionary. I concede that my "boyfriend" of about a week was an "offender" in the sense of going behind his wife's back to go on dates with me. However, I maintain that I am not the offender and that it was not MY extramarital affair. I didn't cheat on anyone, and I didn't know he was married. And you seem to imply that having a boyfriend means sex is a definite. I can assure you that is an ASSUMPTION on your part, and not a fact. In fact, Presby, just about everything you say is an ASSUMPTION. I have plenty of screenshots of some really crazy ASSUMPTIONS by you that have been proven way wrong by time.
One thing I can say is Harry and fools are obsessed with me, and everyone is getting tired of it. Why do you all read anything by me? You say I'm irrelevant, and have nothing original to say, and that I'll never find the chest. So what's your motivation, if not to stalk me and post libelous statements on your blog.
All right, Harry, I've given you enough time to man up. That thread will come down by force. And anyone that supports me in that that thread crossed the line, go to Tapatalk and file a complaint against it. Harry's on his third strike, and if he gets globally moderated again, they'll shut down his blog.
To make a complaint against Harry's Hateful Blog, email support@tapatalk.com and request investigation of the following link:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/chase/loon-delusions-t912.html
The thread clearly violates their term of use, which are:
User Content – Posting
· Be respectful. No personal attacks.
· Offensive, Vulgar or Pornographic Content. You won’t post it.
· Profanity. Don’t direct it at another user.
· Racial Slurs or Bigotry. Don’t post any.
· Intellectual Property. You won’t post someone else’s intellectual property.
· Cross-Posting. Don’t post the same post in more than one location.
· Proper Category. Post in the correct category.
· Recruitment/Solicitation. You won’t recruit or solicit users.
· Relevant Content: Stay on-topic in threads.
· Political Baiting. Be respectful.
· Spamming. Don’t spam.
· Video links/embeds. Describe what you link to. Don’t just post it.
· Affiliate links. Don’t include them in your post.
· Hotlinking. You won’t do it unless the moderator approves.
· Warez. Don’t post or link to it.
Behavior
· Be nice. Don’t be rude. Be mindful of others.
· Identity Spoofing. Be yourself and not someone else. Only use your account.
· Haxor: No computer hacking.
· Trolling & Cyberstalking. You won’t do it.
· Multiple Accounts. Don’t open multiple accounts for the same Site
· Forum Gangs. You won’t start or participate in one.
· Illicit or Illegal Activity. Not allowed here.
· Private Messages. You won’t spam users.
· Board Wars. Don’t engage in them.
· Public Affection. Don’t be overt.
· Obstructing Posts. Keep it to a minimum. Voice your opinion respectfully. No fan flames.
Beginning of original post:
Hey, Loons, how's it going over there on the hate site? Two of you constantly say it's not a hate site, yet several of your members have left because even they say it's a hate site. I don't know how you can keep ignoring what your own members are telling you.
And talk about fake news and twisting facts in an effort to ruin my reputation! Oh my goodness! A relationship that lasted less than a week twenty years ago has been twisted into a major attack point? Presby, get the facts right, for once. I did not have an extramarital affair, as I was not married at the time. HE attempted the extramarital affair. I didn't know he was married when we went jet skiing. I found out after a couple of jet ski/beach dates and that was that.
Your own words in this paragraph are libelous, because you state I had the extramarital affair, which implies I was married, and implies I had sex with him. This is what YOU said (emphasis added), "Don't write about YOUR extramarital affairs. Just don't. For the record, it is not libel for someone to say you knew the circumstances surrounding YOUR affair. What might be libel is to state YOU had one, when you didn't..." UMMM, DO YOU SEE HOW YOUR WORDING IS LIBEL? I SURE DO! And so does Black's Law Dictionary: “sexual intercourse between a man or woman and a person other than the offender’s spouse.” First, of all, I am NOT the offender. Secondly, I never had sexual intercourse with the "offender." We didn't date long enough for that to even happen. So, Mr.- Think-You-Know-the-Law, stating I had an extramarital affair is not only false, but libel.
And... really? The reason I post his picture now, twenty years later, is an attempt at blackmail? Laughable. The guy's wife found out about his infidelity when I found out about it, because she suspected something was up and followed him to my house. Apparently, he had a reputation of infidelity. The wife didn't blame me, and she didn't blame me in the matter. Sometimes I'd see her around base, and we would smile and say hellos. I have no idea where they are today, or what they're doing, and don't care.
But, clearly, by claiming I was the one who had the extramarital affair and by making it something I was to blame for, and by saying I climbed the ranks in inappropriate ways, was libel, because Harry said just after those claims that it made him wonder who else I was "messing around with" in the AF.
And Rooster says there's no way I could not have known I was breaking apart a family? That's libel, and untrue. Twenty years ago, I was extremely naive. I was in the Air Force, and I took integrity seriously. I have the medals, the citations, the special duties which required top secret clearances, and many, many letters of recognition to prove it. I foolishly believed my fellow servicemen and women shared my values. And background checks, as far as I know, weren't a common thing back then. I remember my computer was basically still using dial up AOL. So...fake news!
And then Rooster has the crass and stupid vulgarity to post that picture and say its me. That's LIBEL. And HARRY, you SUPPORT and affirm his libel with your comment just afterward..."Uggh, tummy tuck from hell! Must have cost a bomb or two! Mitty is now the most powerful money reducing agent..." Which further purports the picture being me as fact. Shame on you, Harry.
Oh, I see rooster changed the photo. Still not me, rooster. Still libel. Take it down.
NJFL says the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. That's true. But where are the facts that support I WILL get rid of Fundy if he's no longer useful? Because I gave Monet to a woman who has a dog that looks just like Monet that was about to die, and she loved that dog like her own child?
If you have to know the truth about Monet, here ya go. Over the years, we've had many pets. Every time, I've said that if we bring an animal into the home, the kids have to participate in it's care. Every time, they promised they would. Every time, I was the one who ended up taking care of the pet. The same thing with Monet, but this time, the kids were old enough to really understand what it would take to care for a pet.
And again, I was the only one who ever paid attention to Monet. I was the one who did everything for all the pets. I had warned them that if they didn't take care of the pet, the pet would go to a better home. This time I followed through. Monet is a "people dog." With no one at home all day, she had to be lonely. The kids didn't pay any attention to her. And when I got home every night, I spent time with her, but I didn't feel like it was enough. I didn't feel like Monet was getting the attention and love she deserved. I talked to my coworker, who begged me for Monet. In my heart, I felt it was the right thing to do, even though I really loved Monet.
And it was the right thing to do. Patty sends me videos of Monet and pictures of her all the time. Patty's other dog, Dakota, is still hanging on, although he is very old. Monet has become an angel for Dakota, watching over him and guiding him with little nudges because he is blind. I know I made the right decision. It was a very tough decision to make, but to compare giving a dog to a good home where she would get the love she deserved to dumping Fundy because of a lack of usefulness is just wrong.
And where is the evidence that I won't let Fundy treasure hunt or keep the treasure? Where, oh where, is the evidence?
And...really? I have a history of suing people? Please show me proof! I'd love to see where I've ever brought a lawsuit against another person.
Mdavis, aka Mr. Fireworks "expert," you're a pitiful fool. You get proven wrong over and over, and the people on your blog don't even answer you or take you seriously anymore. For the record, mdavis got banned because when he realized he didn't have enough knowledge to win a debate with me, he started a nasty personal attack, and said many things that crossed the line. I did not ever ask to have him banned.
I never asked to ban anyone but Jamie. And that was a result of advice from the two police officers who came to my home to take my police report. I gave both of the officers names to admin. I don't know whether she called them or not, but I gave both names of the officers (which are not affiliated with the Orlando detective I went on one date with) to admin to give to mdavis to fact check away, but apparently, they'd rather not go through the trouble. Lazy investigative journalism, that is!
Lazy investigative journalism seems to be the way of Harry and Fools. Posting libel with fake news will make you a hero over there.
And Harry, that pic needs to come down. Most of your members with a shred of decency agree. YOU have the ability to take it down. Rooster should not be the one who makes the decision to take it down. YOU, as the OWNER of the site, should take charge of the board when it crosses the line and delete stuff yourself. Are you a man or not? Are you the fair, impartial guy you claim to be? Your own members are calling for the deleting of the thread and the pic. All I care about is the pic. Delete it. You don't want the global moderators to start policing your site again, do you?
Presby, then you keep on libeling me by referring to my "extramarital affair." And you say the pictures of my daughter in a swimsuit were bad guardianship? Really? Have you seen Facebook and Instagram lately, where virtually every mom ever has posted pics of their daughters in swimsuits? And mine was under the water in one pic, and in the other, her arm was over the top half, and the other half was under water? How are those pics inappropriate?
As for my pics, they also showed nothing I'd consider "graphic" or "inappropriate." I'm working hard to get into better shape, and I'm proud of the results. So what? If you don't like what I post, what's the easy answer? DON'T READ IT! I don't force any of you to read my blog. If you aren't a fan of me, don't read it. Simple as pie. But if you keep reading and posting every minute detail of my life, I can only assume you guys are my fans. You sure boosted my blog readership yesterday, which got over two hundred more unique visits than the day before.
At first, I had to laugh as Jamie continued to make even more outrageous claims about my supposed bisexuality. But after I thought about it, I realized how libelous her comment was. I am NOT bisexual, yet she posted that as fact. She also claimed there are pictures of me engaging in sexual acts with AF members. Wow. That's simply insane.
Jamie posted that my daughter WANTED to go live with her grandparents. She claimed that as a fact. It is not a fact. Let me refresh you on the reality of the situation. I was going to move my whole family out to California. I had a job offer and a rent-free place to live. I had decided to go ahead with the move, but I wouldn't be able to move before the new school year started. The grandparents offered to let the kids move out there a little early so they wouldn't have to start school late. Callie accepted the offer, but Joe wanted to wait for me. After more careful thought, and circumstances with my mom's health, I decided moving wasn't the right answer at the time. By then, Callie had made some good friends, and liked the school she was attending more than her school in NSB. So, I allowed her to stay. The story is all on my blog--go back and read it. Yet Jamie continues to lie when the facts are out there for everyone to read. Why does no one fact check the filth that constantly spews out of her mouth?
All right, I guess that's enough for now. I just wanted to set the record straight. Again. I'm sure the haters will nit pick every word, and twist this into something else, but that's a reflection on them. More and more people are realizing what that forum is really about and jumping that sinking ship.
Correctamundo!!!!!