Lakewood Buzz -- heavily censored

[Jim O'Bryan]

you know, jim, i did find it interesting that mar's first post was the start of this thread.

I find it odd that Mar has nothing more to add to the board but a free ad.

Desperate measures from desperate people.


.

[Jim O'Bryan]

I think Ken Warren's take on the psychological attributes of both boards is very informed.

Mark

I appreciate the kind words, but is there room for a board that allows a very qualified candidate to get attacked over her sexuality, time and time again by people using faux names.

Nickie is a damn good person with a lot to add to the conversation and the city. But those that hide in the Buzz's closet with a fake name and attack are some how given credit!

Is there room for a board that attacks the School Board again and again using faux names. Ed Favre's daughter grew up in the Lakewood School system and was very active in Lakewood Sports. After graduating from college she has came home, found a job with the school that helped produce her, and is serving that system and our city very, very well. But at the Buzz she is attacked, by people without the stones to put their names on the attacks.

At the Observer we look at how to attract people like Ms Favre back to our city. Over there they throw stones and drive them away. It serves all of us how?

It's crazy. There is no way to defend when one or more use fake names and attack with NO FACTS.

Why not just have a party where everyone can wear white sheets, then we can talk about gays, blacks, or "those people." When people hide it is always, repeat always for the worst reasons. It merely brings out the worst in people?

Personally I find it hard to believe that the largest marketeer of Open Source and having the "stones" to put it out there, thinks it serves ANY PUROSE other then cater to the weak. The very people that have crippled this city and stopped it from moving forward.

(read quick I am sure it will be deleted quickly by me.)


.

[Tracy Jones]

Hey Mark, maybe I wouldn't want a stranger calling me up because he saw my name on an internet forum and then looked me up in the phone book. Okay, just kidding Mark. But really, there are some whacky people out there in cyberspace, what if one decides to stalk you because they took issue with one of your postings? It's a real possibility these days.

Jim, I haven't experienced any censorship on the Buzz. I also haven't seen any postings referring to the LO there. Maybe there is censorship there, but I have not seen any derogatory or complementary comments intended for anyone concerned with the LO. I can't say the same for here. As for nasty comments and attacks it is unfortunate, I never take those types seriously, and I am glad they do not know MY name.

[Jim O'Bryan]

I also haven't seen any postings referring to the LO there.

Exactly. But there were many. Like I said to Mar. go have the topic about the Observer there, it will not happen.

As for the attacks, from me, to be honest I am livid and will make no bones about it. Mar shows up attacks us for censorship, but never realizes that the Buzz is a very heavily censored forum because if it does not run with the thoughts of the owner it is deleted immediately.

Which is supported by the community? Count the ads, count the members, count the hits. the city has embraced the Observer, businesses embrace the Observer. Council embraces the Observer. We are solvent and growing like a weed. Next year, you will be able to get the Observer in more ways than most care to dream about. This is because of the finanacial clout given to us with trust from the business leaders of the city.

Here the inmates run the asylum. There is no effort to censor anyone, but strangely enough we have never even had to think about. Could it possible be for two reasons 1) People tend to be more civil when comments are associated to them. 2) Libel and slander laws, that the Buzz have found easier not to be part of.

Two years ago I was slandered and attacked by someone with a faux name. They attacked me, my family and my business. What recourse do I have, does Ed have, does Nicki have, none. How on earth is this positive?

I have no problem with people being members of both boards, I have never put limitations on members or what they want to talk about. Even the advisory board does not agree and we voice that freely. However none of that is true at the Buzz.

I do find it odd that so many members of the Buzz sign on with real names and then fight to change the only rule we have, and the one that raises the level of discussion to heights never seen in this city before.

Simply put, if you need to hide behind a faux name there is the Buzz, if you want to talk about ANYTHING in Lakewood and find energized people willing to work together there is the Observer, and you can know who they are. As Ken points out room for both. However I disagree about the value of a board that supports private attacks on public people. But hey that's just me. Ken supports it, I do not but we can discuss that in open like adults.

Obviously you support or are willing to think personal attacks against people is OK, and that you need to change the Observer so that these people have another forum to wage war in.

If that is the case, can you possibly understand that in an effort to not step on Steve's toes that the Observer created something uniquely different? That in an effort to not infringe on his brand, we got together and created something FRESH?

As for wacky people in Cyber Space what about Brother Petty that worked every board in town? The only protection you have on the net is open source. This is obvious.
.

[Tracy Jones]

"Obviously you support or are willing to think personal attacks against people is OK, and that you need to change the Observer so that these people have another forum to wage war in. "

There you go , jumping to conclusions. Where did I ever say that I wanted to change the Observer or condone personal attacks? I note that you ignored the stalker issue entirely.

[Jim O'Bryan]

"Obviously you support or are willing to think personal attacks against people is OK, and that you need to change the Observer so that these people have another forum to wage war in. "

There you go , jumping to conclusions. Where did I ever say that I wanted to change the Observer or condone personal attacks? I note that you ignored the stalker issue entirely.

Tracy I apologize but it seemed to me that you were all about letting people post with fake names. My point was we are not headed that way.

Stalker issue? Ignored? I commented on Brother Petty, a child stalker using fake names, that was outed only because of not being allowed to use a fake name.

On the Buzz I was stalked, I had every problem one could have from a board. But in the end the fake names only protected the stalker not the one stalked. This is what I find so confusing with the argument. But let me be honest, I am prejudiced about this topic.

People that fear retribution can visit every inch of our site that has nothing to do with the paper. We limit nothing but, if you want to post, you have to be willing to take ownership of that post.

Is that really that bad of a rule?

[Tracy Jones]

Not a bad rule, but possibly not for everyone? The stalking you were referring to was possible because you used your real name, not a "faux" name. But , the LO is your baby, and you make the rules, same as the other guy over at the Buzz and if we wish to play we must follow the rules of the game.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Not a bad rule, but possibly not for everyone? The stalking you were referring to was possible because you used your real name, not a "faux" name. But , the LO is your baby, and you make the rules, same as the other guy over at the Buzz and if we wish to play we must follow the rules of the game.

Tracey

The problem came from trying to find out who the stalker was. an illegal act protected by the board.

The Observer is not my project, it is OUR project yours too. I did not start it by myself. Ken Warren and I worked for over a year on it. I never wanted to own it, and truth be told I still do not want to own it. How does one own a public discussion? As I pointed out we looked at The Buzz and went out of our way to make it as different as possible. We addressed what we saw as huge flaws.

The Observer was not created to compete with the Buzz it was created to help the city move forward. This is one of the reasons I feel outraged over being dragged into defending the Observer against things that are just not true. I should ignore but I feel I should defend everyone that has worked so hard to make this happen.


.

[kate parker]

my number is not listed

that's probably a good thing since my ideas, posts, rantings are adverse to (from what i can tell) most of the posters here. but as of this post, nothing i have written here has been censored or deleted. i count that as a good thing. i like being able to express my ideas without seeing "message edited by admin". i am proud to use my name (you'll all know who to kick around whenever any of you should meet me ).

happy thursday, people.

kate

[Mark Schroeder]

The shadow is that part of ourselves that we hide, repress, or deny.

If a certain part of our population needs to express themselves in a shadowy way, so be it.

I for one don't have time to read the shadowy stuff.

[Jeff Endress]

Okay everybody.....let's return to original start of this thread, that being whether censorship exists on the Observation Deck. As I review the myriad opinions expressed here by real persons, I glean that there in no censorship of submitted posts, but there is restriction as to the ability to post. Two very separate and distinct propositions.

Does the requirement of using your real name cause SELF REGULATION? Perhaps, but that is a choice made by those in determining what they wish to say, and whether they wish to take ownership of that which is being said. If persons choose not to contribute their thoughts and ideas for fear that being personally identified with those thoughts and ideas it is their choice to be made. This does not constitute censorship, which by any definition, requires that a third party pass upon what can and can't be said.

It's is really quite simple. You may express your thoughts and ideas, and enter into ongoing discussions, limited only by the requirements that you do so under the name by you are legally addressed.

As to this ongoing discussion of this board vs. any other board.....

There is no right or wrong. If you feel that donning a mask to shout your message is appropriate, then so be it. Have at it. You have the choice and others reading or discussing have the ability to determine whether discussions made under pseudonyms have weight and credibility, or whether unwillingness to take ownership serves to diminish the impact and importance of the message. Again, no wrong, no right, merely a choice.

Is one forum "better" then another? Define better. Is beer better than wine? Is dim sum better than pasta? When you compare two wholly different items, there is no basis to determine which is "better". I would submit that, at the end of the day, the one which has the greatest impact, accomplishes that which it seeks to accomplish, and fulfills its mission to the greatest degree could logically be determined to have a more viable operational protocol. So, perhaps we should revisit the issue at a point in the future to gage what any given board sought to accomplish, and how closely they were able a achieve that which was their goal.

Jeff

“The difference between a liberal and a conservative is a conservative prays in public and drinks in private and a liberal prays in private and drinks in publicâ€Â￾

Gabriel Garcia Marquez

[Mar Kelleher]

Here I am, Mr. O'Boyle.

A real live person!

The Administrator of the Board E-mailed me privately, wanted my address and telephone number. I responded. Since you probably won't believe ME, ask dLMeckes if I responded, and if I was truthful.

One teeny issue: Ooops -- Mar is just a nickname. My real name is Mary Beth. But I go by Mar. Hope I didn't DECEIVE anyone.

And surprise! I'm all woman, Mr. O'Boyle.

Lived in Lakewood since I was 5.

Graduated from LHS, class of '73. Never failed a class.

Rented property in Lakewood between ages 21 and 30.

Bought a fixer-upper, and it's now worth $100,000 more than what I paid for it. It was the eyesore of the neighborhoods. I am very proud of it. Lived here over 20 years. Getting ready to paint it for the 3rd time since I've been here.

Never been to jail. Never had a moving violation.

Have worked since the age of 16, my first job at the Frosty Bar of downtown's May Company; 2nd for a prominent downtown attorney; now work for a lawyer with nationwide prominence who practices right here in the center of Lakewood. Have worked for him for over 28 years. He's one of the good ones. We came to Lakewood for its location and convenience to our clients who did not like going downtown.

Get regular checkups. Doctor and dentist in Lakewood, too.

Oh yeah, I'm in the phone book, too. Have had the same phone number for almost 30 years. But I screen my calls. Wink

And now -- Mr. O'Boyle has a flare for drama, and he uses the following incendiary and inflammatory words directed towards me:

troubled
obviously mixed up
need to hide
scream
can't cope
hide
sneak
pervert
complain
hide (oops, says that twice)
attack
make false accusations
whine
preach
spew

There may be more, but to be honest I have not read his last few posts, as I'm in a bit of a hurry. I'm off to live my life with my beloved horse, and not sit in front of a computer screen.

With much respect to the rest of you, I think I'll take this site off my Favorites List. My computer time is limited -- I work hard and don't have much time to play. And I have no incentive to come back.

Sorry, I edited this but returned everything to original state. Jim

[Jim O'Bryan]

Mar


Simply the same check everyone goes through.

People ar either vouched for, or checked out by board workers.

Sorry about the mix up on your post, but it was returned to the original state.

Again, 1,000 apoligies for the mix up.

I hope you change your mind and stay, but in the end your choice is yours, and I would have it no other way.

Please feel free to delte anything you need to. Our checks are not made public and the information is shared by no one.

Jim O'Boyle. ooooops O'Bryan


PS - Isn't it nice to at least know who to blame, and that your post was NEVER deleted or edited.

[Jeff Endress]

While we will certainly miss Mar, and her great Lakewood credentials, her last post does point up an interesting benefit of requiring ownership of posts. Without that requirement, she would have never known that the object of her disdain was OB. She could have found herself at an LHS function unwittingly sitting next to him! Now at least she can screen his calls.

Don't know who any of the anonymous posters are on other boards, but there are several whose calls I would refuse, if I only knew who they really were !

Jeff

[Danielle Masters]

I for one am okay using my real name. I think its great to be able to meet real people that I've already met online. Some of my friends have told me that they won't join because they worry about using their real names and I think that is fine too. On the issue of censorship on the buzz. There is a conversation on there about bald eagles in Lakewood and I have been wondering why no one mentioned you could find the proof if you visit LO's website. Perhaps someone has mentioned it, but their post got deleted. I don't know just a thought.