BagLovingMom said:^^^ Truly a lawyer Kam!
EEEsssh -- sorry! I feel a bit bad for stirring up such drama.
BagLovingMom said:^^^ Truly a lawyer Kam!
edsbgrl said:Why not?????......gotta love free speech!
I think we can wonder, comment and speak our minds without having posted bags.
:weird: "Imaginary stalker"????
I'm not picking on you but I can see how some of things you've said have gotten under other people's skin. I think there's difference between caution and being parinoid, which you've admitted you are.
I'll give you a situation that happened on another forum I'm a member of:
For years there was a girl who claimed all these things about herself. She was very happily married to a doctor, lived in an upscale neighborhood, pretty much had it all. Never posted pics of herself. She was a member of the forum for years and made friends with several of the people at the forum. Deep friendships were built.........Fast forward years later, she tells people on the forum she's pregnant with her first child!!!! People sent gifts to her address, congratulated her etc. Come to find out she had raised some suspicsions of a few friends she had made b/c she claimed she was 4wks preg. but posted a u/s pic of a fetus much older than what hers should have looked like. Its turns out everything she had stated about herself for all those years was a complete lie! So many people got hurt b/c of that, some have never come back to that forum. This was a forum much like this one where a bunch of women (and a few men) came to talk about life, pop culture, shopping you name it. And several of them got close to one another via the forum. Because of what happened most everyone on that forum refuses to talk to people who don't at least post a self pic in their avitar.
I'm not saying that you should give any info you don't want to give but try to understand other people's points of view on this issue.
No no, it makes me proud, I'm a lawyer, and lawyers can be so annoying . I think Kam's comments are far more reasonable perception than "liberal interpretation." Personally I would have skipped the thread altogether rather than offend people, but that's my own cost/benefit analysis. Some things are simply not worth putting out there just for the sake of putting it out there I think. I too wondered about the "distinguished private family" comment, what were we to take away from that? Completely smacks of elitist BS to me.kam said:EEEsssh -- sorry! I feel a bit bad for stirring up such drama.
star3777 said:A. I am advising not to skip threads, meaning free speech. What are you talking about?
B.I did not suggest that anyone who did not post their bags should not speak their minds. I said that I post enough bags to wonder if there could be someone who would target me - and I take that seriously.
C. I am not a liar, It would be like wearing a fake LV I guess. I resent that you inferred I am like that girl in your story.
kam said:A. I have never heard of anyone having their identity stolen from giving out their FIRST name, or their dogs name. But if you think that is possible, that is your own right (and your own comfort zone). BUT it was an issue you brought to the forefront by stating you were being "wise" by not posting your FIRST name or your DOGS names. Insinuating that anyone who decided to post such private information was being unwise.
B. You said, and I directly quote -- "I am a private person from a distinguished private family.... While the first statement is innocuous, the second "distinguished private family" -- is making an insinuation. Why is it relevant? What were you trying to say? That only the hoi polloi would give out their first name?
C. When I say "to the effect of" and that "I generalize" that means that I am not directly quoting you. I was trying to make a point that you were coming across as accusatory.
D. If you were not trying to make a vague accusation why did you write that you were "9 hackers attempted to infiltrate my computer last night" in response to edsbgrl's post?
E. I have absolutely no problem with you playing devils advocate. And I have no problem with you giving your opinion. But if your opinion is that you are being "wise" for not posting the information re: the very SUBJECT of the thread - you should be prepared for people to be offended. Especially after they have already posted that information.
BagLovingMom said:No no, it makes me proud, I'm a lawyer, and lawyers can be so annoying . I think Kam's comments are far more reasonable perception than "liberal interpretation." Personally I would have skipped the thread altogether rather than offend people, but that's my own cost/benefit analysis. Some things are simply not worth putting out there just for the sake of putting it out there I think. I too wondered about the "distinguished private family" comment, what were we to take away from that? Completely smacks of elitist BS to me.
star3777 said:You got it I guess. I won't post as much of that **** I guess, but it is in me. After all, this is a shallow site.
star3777 said:You got it I guess. I won't post as much of that s**t I guess, but it is in me. After all, this is a shallow site.