Mark--just abandon this account (or have gather delete it after you've removed all content) and create a new one under a different name. You won't be able to live a lie of this proportion down.
Alternatively, you may consider that there are enough people ranting against Obama here already, and your services are needed on other sites. Start over fresh--just don't claim anything that's as easy to check as having been a POW in Vietnam.
Aniko, Jun 4, 2008, 4:35pm EDT
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 59
Idiots.
(Note to Uno-bomber: I know how to turn off ratings. If I don't, it's because we get points when we're rated, whatever the rating is. So go ahead, please. Use your alters too. Throw'em at me. Thank you.)
You go girl!
The author and I disagreed on that, and, on a side track, on the degree of participation of various Central European countries in the same war, with me asking whether people of his (and my) ethnicity should have been interned too. A fairly long and calm comment of mine on these topics triggered the POW story on his part, which then led to the rest of this mess after more and more people asked him about the veracity of that claim.
I'm just publishing these as a contribution to Gather culture, so to speak. The more people publish their removed comments, the less point there is in removing comments, unless of course they are abusive or demonstrably false. Chances are, the commenter won't publish those.
I thought that's what he was doing when he changed his name and icon, but he's there telling everyone the whole story (from his point of view). What was the point in removing the article then?
Actually, a pretty apt choice, since the original Clem K. was an ignorant bumpkin, too.
That's what I was wondering about--why chose a character who's ... well, not really smart?
You are such a rabble-rouser!!!
But if someone specifically appoints me as a rabble-rouser, why not play along?
I kind of like the rabble-rouser side of you. : )
You aren't easily swayed, but you can also see other viewpoints. Your questions are worth answering. Those who do not answer often cannot -- you are rendered rhetorical, or removed. I suspect you have some sort of connection to the letter R.
;-)
(I wonder how Peter gets away with it? And Clark K.? They must be part of the Big Conspiracy that Runs Everything.)
She is, and that's why she gets deleted. The people who don't understand that there is a difference between fact and opinion don't usually abide level-headed people well.
If anyone's been looking for any interesting deleted articles with the method I mentioned yesterday and didn't find them, let me know. Perhaps I can help....
You know Sharon I would never have pinged you if you hadn't pinged me FIRST. And the only time you get pinged by me is when I get one from you FIRST so stop complaining, and stop pinging people if you don't like getting pinged BACK.
Funny I could have sworn I explained that on Peter's article, ahhh well, no one really READS this stuff anyway. The discussion had left the topic of Barack Obama and turned into a discussion of whether Muslims support terrorism. It was out of hand so I got rid of it. I thought that was Author's prerogative. Buuuuuut I guess the left only considers it another form of censorship. So be it.
oooh scary racist hobo clown above stephanie! run!!!
As for your deleting the article because it turned into a discussion on Muslims and whether they support terrorism, no one is buying that. First of all, your article included references to Muslims and terrorism, so the question of what percentage supports or doesn't support it was quite relevant. (Your problem with Obama, after all, was the he promised to defend Muslims from persecution resulting from the perception that they are terrorists.) Secondly, this question came up very early in the comment thread. We all know that was not when you removed the article. We all know when you did.
And of course, if people really removed articles because the comment thread went off topic, there would be no articles here.
Naturally, you were well within your right to remove your article (="prerogative")--but so are we within ours to discuss your choice to do so.
Why are people afraid of discussion?
Eight years of NO discussion????/
Michael you're a broken record and I'm tired of it. You're not going to be happy no matter what is said so don't bother me anymore. FAIR WARNING. This topic is off limits on my articles and any further discourse from you in regards to it will be immediately DELETED. You have been given fair warning. I don't GIVE a rat's ass what you think of me or what my claim is. This is MY space and YOU ARE NO LONGER WELCOME HERE. If you think that's censorship too bad.
Clyde Kadidlehopper, Jun 3, 2008, 5:30pm EDT
As you can see, it's not addressed to me, but then he had told me to get lost before. I could copy all of that, if he so desires.... though I suspect he doesn't, since that's on the article he removed.
Why would one want to keep digging deeper into an uncomfortalbe pit?
Better to start over.
So the dim-wiited clown (not the one in the White House) pretends to god-like authority.
You reap what you sow.
"I told you not to talk about my lies and deceptions, now look what you made me do".
I see a bitter harvest being reaped, but it is not being done by any one whose comments were removed.
He felt he had the right to censor you (This is MY space and YOU ARE NO LONGER WELCOME HERE.), but your comments are your own to do with as you will. You chose to create your own space with them. I don't see that you owned him a say in your article if you were not welcome in his.
I'm fine with you choosing to do so, but I disagree that you were obligated. If he wanted the contrast he should not have disallowed you from his own venue where he held sway.
Just my opinion.
Because you think I wanted to avoid discussion of my imprisonment? Get a life lady. Ok, here's some info for your morbid curiosity. I'm not on the government list because technically I wasn't a pow. I was never in the military. I was part of another organization. Here's a another hint for you. I studied flying from the time I was 13 and am one of the few pilots ever to achieve a multi-engine license (prop) before I turned 19. I haven't flown a plane since I was 22. Too many bad memories associated with it.
I have a very hard time discussing this. I don't even discuss it with my FAMILY much less strangers on a web site. It's really no one's business but mine. Btw, I wasn't released, I escaped.
It is of course possible that whatever special circumstances you mysteriously refer to kept you off the lists. However, the DPMO website lists escapees as well as released prisoners (and of course those who didn't return), and they list civilians too. Any US citizen they have information about. They don't have any about you, and it's up to each reader at this point to decide what they think is the more likely explanation. It is indeed time to drop the discussion.
As for "getting a life"--no, thanks. I already have one too many.
I doubt it. The number of articles and comments both you AND Peter are posting indicate you have NO life outside the internet. I however Do have a life and have decided to return to it. This is my last post on Gather. Ya'll will have to decide for yourself whether the Pilot (my nickname elsewhere) was lying or not.
I'm gone like the wind.
POOF*******
I can't speak for Peter, but I have six pages of articles, and I've only ever deleted one (the very first one here, which was a contest entry, and which I intended to publish elsewhere). I've been a Gather member since January 15th, 2006. I'll call that 29 months, and 6x20=120 "articles"* 120/29= 4.13 "articles" per month. Surely, that leaves some room for a "life".
(The one in quotes is not what I meant, but let's leave it that way.)
I do leave a lot of comments on some days. On others, as some will note, I'm not around at all.
* There are 20 articles displayed per page, but I didn't bother to count if there are that many on the last page. Also, some of them are one-word notices or experiments on who can see what.
Then I had to go write an entire article of apology because I was afraid I might have offended someone. ...people tend to assume every comment deletion is intentional.
Let's examine that, and let's concentrate on this year because like most junkies your habit is escalating and I doubt you're even aware of it. You have written 37 articles since the beginning of this year, an average of 1 every 4.5 day. Not particularly excessive but still it shows you're regular and definitely have acquired a habit. You have also entered approximately 2600 comments in that same time period. Yes you have, I counted them. And THAT my dear is an average of 15 per day since Jan 1 of 2008. Definitely a sign of internet addiction. Orrrrrr maybe you're just addicted to arguing, and the sight of your own writing. Don't bother protesting you're not on every day, that only makes it WORSE not better. It means somedays you're entering none but others maybe 40 or MORE. Here's a bet for you. I bet you can't stay off your computer for a month.
Go find the light, there is one outside the internet lol.
Don't bother responding, I was bored and checked back. Won't happen again.
BTW stephanie, you sure do impress easily LOL.
Now about counting the number of comments someone you don't care about has left since the beginning of the year on a website you don't plan to return to.... I don't know. Not that there's anything wrong with it, and I commend your new-found respect for hard data--it just seems a tad more obsessive and more pointless than most of what I do here.
Go find the light, there is one outside the internet lol.
Since I've been finding a lot of light out there recently, I'm currently nursing a sunburn, so I'll stay indoors today, thank you.
I have no intention of "staying off my computer for a month", since it's the main way I talk to relatives and friends thousands of miles away. There are other, off-line things I use a computer for--I could certainly buy a typewriter instead, but it would be an extra expense, and it isn't quite clear what the point would be. And why not parchment and a quill?
Don't bother responding, I was bored and checked back. Won't happen again.
I have kids, so I'm quite familiar with lame attempts of trying to get the last word. :-) If you're bored though, you seem to be the one in need of a life.
I love to watch you joust. Although you probably don't permanently affect your targets themselves, I'll bet you affect the opinions of some of the folks watching from the sidelines.
That thing yesterday was unrelated this. No need to worry. :-)
Great comment, Aniko.