I'd say something like "have fun experimenting on people," but someone might take it literally, so I'll just say I lost respect for you just now, and of course, that I am holier-than-thou. ;)

Why waste many arrows when one ample set of boobies is more than enough to knock Will off balance?

Photoshop that, Belmont.

KA

Had Will not denied having written what is alleged, and not claimed to have never used the word in public or in private, and had he not owned up to other disparaging comments; and had Harmony and Stak and Spurve claimed to have seen the word written in such a way as to avoied the automatic software censor, rather than claiming to have seen the word, itself; were there some empirical way to determine whether Stak and Spurve were logged in and viewing the post during the two hours prior to harmony's censor, and had those participating during the two hours prior to her censorship had made mention of the alleged offense, and had just the alleged word been deleted, or had the post been moved to another forum where it was permitted to stand in its now alleged modified form, instead of the whole thing being deleted, then MsJack may have a case.

She does, however, have a point about false memory. Unfortunately, she doesn't grant the distinct possibility that it wasn't Will who was falsely remembering.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

My error

I would be disappointed in myself were my social 'experiment" to entail goading people into extreme behaviors.

But, it wasn't. Instead, I was interested to see how far they were willing to go in SPITE of my not-so-subtle reminders to the contrary about presumption of innocense, rules of evidence, and more appropriate venues, and more effectual approaches to judging.

Evidently, one of the problems of group indignation and mob mentality is that it profoundly blinds people to their own indignant or disappointing behavior. They are so intense in pointing the finger of outrage that they fail to see their own outrageous actions, and this even when it is being repeatedly pointed out to them.

Now, you evidently were human enough to have gotten somewhat caught up in the firestorm--though I still respect you very much and am not the least bit disappointed in you (and this since I tend to thoughtfully judge people on balance rather than rashly in terms of a single instance).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

This reminds me of an MD thread several years back that was devoted specifically to the assests in question-- following your attendance, in a self-admitted revealing dress, at the Ex-Mo conference and the group meeting at the bar around the same time.

I am wondering if someone would be so kind as to find a link to that thread so we can compare and contrast some of the comments made there by men and women alike, with some of what Will is being condemned for now.

My intent, once again, is to put things into perspective.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I demonstrated what I saw here, in the forum that allows for it. People will either believe me or they won't, and since Wade, Will, and Droops have already drew their line in the sand, I expect them to toe it. I can't imagine there is much more to be said.

That's because it is highly unlikely that three people would all have a false positive memory about the same event. Will has, quite possibly, already demonstrated that he had forgotten about another incident where he called Emma a b****. (I added the asterisks, not the filter.)

As for the word being written in such a way as to avoid filtering, you wouldn't have to assume that was the intent. For example, if he had used an "a" before the word "she is ac***", it would look like a typo. Why would anyone remark about that? Most of the time, it is generally considered bad form to make a big deal about minor spelling errors and typos.

To be fair, then, I apologize to Will for suggesting that he was lying. I do, however, think there is sufficient evidence to show that he did use the C-word. I don't think there is sufficient evidence to show that he remembers using it and possibly some evidence to show that he forgot.

I once posted actual photos of the dress, and it has now been determined by Will that I was in all likelihood NOT the woman he remembers from the Exmormon conference.

By the way, you long ago pledged to cease replying to me. You are manifestly not a man of your word.

KA

Reluctantly, I have to admit I agree with Wade.

Say what you want about Will, god knows I have said plenty, but he doesn't strike me as someone who would go through the trouble of trying to circumvent the board software just so the C-word could be read in its uncensored form. That just doesn't make any sense to me.

And harmony, Stak, and Spurven strike you as people that would lie about this?

I consider Stak and Spurven friends, at least on the Internet, so it's hard for me to dismiss their testimony about how the C-word incident went down, but this part of the story just doesn't make any sense to me. I have absolutely no confidence in harmony's recollection of the events, for reasons I started to explain here. I believe she was offended by something Will wrote. Based on her reaction, I think it really struck a nerve. I also read that thread as it was happening, and I don't remember seeing the C-word at all. I could have missed it, of course, since harmony deleted the whole post, but I definitely would have noticed and said something had I seen it.

Eric, why do you think Will would have needed to alter the forum's code in order to communicate the C-word?

Will is the only one here with a documented (long) history of lying, and he has all the motive in the world to lie now. I don't see the other folks here, myself included, with much of a motive to lie about this, nor do I find it likely that we all just decided to lie at the same time about the same thing.

And if you listen to what Will's account entails, it is pretty ridiculous. Do you really think harmony would censor his post for simply calling her a hypocrite and embarrassment? This has to be among the least offensive things Will has ever said, and yet it created a firestorm of protests from numerous posters? Not likely.

Evaluating evidence can be a tricky thing sometimes, but if I have to weigh the personal testimony of three people that don't have any motivation to lie (and even if you assume harmony did have motivation, you still have two people) against another person's personal incredulity and the witness of one person who we know has forgotten making claims like this in the past (or he lied), I think I'm going to go with the former. YMMV.

The C-word would have been automatically censored by the board software if he just typed it out directly. I just don't see him adding spaces or misspelling it on purpose so that it could be seen in its uncensored form. I really doubt he made an effort to make sure the C-word was read by all without asterisks. But I could be wrong.




I definitely get what you're saying, and I believe he said something much worse than a hypocrite and an embarrassment. I think he doesn't remember what he said, which is understandable since the post is gone now. I have no doubt that it was mean and extremely offensive. I just don't know if I believe that he used the C-word.

Oh OK, I get what you're saying now. The thing is, I think Will is exactly the kind of person who puts a lot of detailed effort in his posts.

And from what I've seen, the forum software only edits out the letters after the first letter. So he wouldn't really need to do much except write it out like he would normally for everyone to understand what he meant - there's not too many four lettered, filtered words beginning with C.

I don't recall exactly how he typed it out, but Mr. Stak says he remembers him typing out each letter spaced out in bold text. I don't even remember what it was he said exactly, but I do remember it was very harsh, and it wasn't what Will claims, which tells me he is lying from his end already.

Well, Stak remembers specifically how it was written. Will is a smart guy. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that he would know that straight profanity would be censored automatically. So why wouldn't he put spaces in the word to make sure that it can be seen?

You seem to be hung up on the fact that it would take an "effort", as though Will would just give up after seeing that the board censored it. What ever you might say about Will, he doesn't strike me as one who would not do something because it requires a little effort.

Stak and Spurven's testimony is - by far - the most difficult part about this for me. All that aside, I have to ask myself why Will would want the C-word to be uncensored.



I'm hung up on the fact that it doesn't seem like something he would do. As Kevin mentioned, it's pretty obvious what the word is even with the three asterisks. So why do something to ensure that such an ugly word is uncensored? It doesn't make any sense to me.

Hey Eric,

It shouldn’t. I don’t think anything will change if we all some how come to consensus about this specific issue. My testimony on it is what it is, and hardly makes a dent (positive or negative) in the case MsJack laid out in her OP(s). I imagine we all made up our minds already about Will, so go with your gut. I take zero offense if you find what I have to say persuasive or not, because the matter is trivial and has zero to do with our friendship.

I’m not an unbiased observer, granted I hardly know anything about the KEP or Will’s work with it, I don’t like the guy at all and that is probably pretty obvious. I prefer to let Will show everyone himself what kind of person he is instead of taking my word for it.

We are talking about Will here, aren't we?