Nicole shared a photo of one of the youngest children after a haircut.

I think Nicole is beyond foolish for spreading photos of her children around like she does but she pays no attention to what I think, so it’s irrelevant.

But one of the Facebook pages shared the photo as well, along with commentary about how the child looks.

That Facebook page has nothing to do with me.

I didn’t do it. I don’t agree with it.  Beyond the fact that I would never share a photo of a child like that, especially if I were the child’s mother, there is nothing wrong with the photo. The kid looks just fine.  He’s cute. The haircut is cute.

I am, of course, getting blamed for it, because that is what always happens. “The blog” is vile because some idiot, absolute idiot, shared that photo on Facebook.

That Facebook page has nothing to do with me.



30 thoughts on “Disclaimer”

  1. Sharing the picture feeds right into Nicole’s hands. It was stupid to share it. Plus he’s a cute kid with a cute new haircut. Thanks Sally.


  2. I believe children are off limits, but then the BO goes and does something so foolish, every pedophile out there has marked those kids already.


  3. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the picture. Looks like a typical kid to me. At least there’s no food stuck to his face and obvious filth…as is fairly typical for Nicole’s sense of what’s “cute”.

    Of the gazillion pics I’ve seen of Nick’s kids….that photo is one of the nicer ones out there. Someone combed his hair. Someone washed him off. Those are GOOD things…they’re a step in the right direction. I don’t see the point of criticizing improved effort…I think the kid looks great in that pic, and I hope Nicole keeps doing better with her kid’s hygiene.

    I DO think Nick is feeding photos of her kids to any number of pedophiles. One sick bastard finds kids to watch and shares a link with a darknet pedo group, and they’re all watching. I DO think posting their routine and address endangers those kids. I think Nick and Joe are incredibly naive about the very real dangers that exist. The Naug kids would be prime candidates for human trafficking, too. (which I know sounds insanely far fetched…but if photos reach the darknet and a particular kid catches the eye of a particular sick freak, they really don’t know what they’re playing with)

    I honestly don’t know why she doesn’t have a better protective instinct where her kids are concerned, or more common sense.

    I guess internet drama/fame is more important to her than protecting her kids from abduction/torture/child prostitution.


  4. Stop sharing pictures of minors online, Nicole. They are going to straight-up resent you for it. This much I know is true. The internet is a swamp, so-to-speak. Why would you expose a sweet image of your child to it’s far-reaches?! Especially when you are already aware of trolls creeping about.

    Honestly, the internet is changing. Privacy is going to become so coveted, so valued. Give children the right to their own autonomy! A seven year-old, even a ten or twelve year-old, cannot grasp the consequences her own consent – the consent to post that photo online – has on her future. Therefore she cannot consent.


  5. Usually, I think some of the concerns voiced herein the comments are outlandish. Fuck, I do hate the hypotheticals most of all. But gosh, reading them just now, I realized – lets just say, a Naugler child were kidnapped – that child has no real, verifiable identity! Who is to say who his legal birthparents or legal guardians are? What a nightmare.


  6. Not all 3 year olds have picture perfect skin. We live next to a wetland, and the noseeums are just awful in the spring. The mosquitos I can handle, but those noseeums bite are really bad and swell up horribly for everyone in our family. Once you scratch much, you have a scar.

    The Ns do need to do more than their home first aid. I don’t think you can make a case for that based upon this particular photo. The kid is cute, and I understand wanting to share it with pride. She’s using a blog page to make up for the aunts, uncles, cousins, and grandparents adulation she really wants and needs. That is the heart of this issue; and you can’t maybe up for family with random strangers.


  7. The photos alone aren’t a problem. The fact that those photos are linked to their legal first and last names, their ages, their location, and in some cases photos of their actual birth is the problem.

    Parents should view their children’s identities as precious resources to be safeguarded until kids are adults and take over that identity for themselves. The internet never forgets, those photos and blog posts will follow them for the rest of their lives. Instill in your kids that their identity is a resource and it is their responsibility to protect it.

    Never use your last name online if you have an unusual first name.

    Never use your children’s names online in any context whatsoever (even if the name is common). Instead of their legal names, use initials or nicknames.


  8. A very cute healthy kid. I do believe Nicole loves her children. Joe though blows. Joe loves and care for Joe. He and his needs come first, weed, guns, food and his comfort. He could care less about making rent or providing food on the table. If Nicole job wasn’t bringing in enough money to make the next shed payment or land lease payment I don’t believe Joe would care. I can’t see him going out to get a job, cause like he already has a job. I guess he’s never heard of having a 2nd job. Lots of people do. Even, and especially those with large families. We did it. In fact we have each had two jobs each to support our large family. And no, our kids didn’t suffer from lack of parental guidance. If I wasn’t there my husband was there an vis a versa. There is no excuse for Joe no doing more, unless he has a health condition Nicole isn’t telling about. Nicole in her lastest selfie of herself looks unwell, tired and old before her time.


  9. I saw the page post. I agree that they shouldn’t have shared the child’s photo, but I agreed with the assessment the page posted.


  10. If Nic doesn’t want commentary on her lifestyle or children than she knows to keep it off the public plate. That’s it, that’s all. She is a smart cookie, she knows how to crop a photo like a a champ. She also knows how to monitor the web 24 7 and strike when the iorn is hot. She got lucky today with a perfect little storm… no big deal.

    I may not choose to share and comment on kid pics, Sally you may feel the same way even more so, but what OFOTGS posted today was not illegal, immoral or fattening…even if it was slightly off base and more than slightly distasteful.

    Since when are we called to be above reproach in all we say and do whilst Nauglering?


  11. Since when are we called to be above reproach in all we say and do whilst Nauglering?

    “We” aren’t. I am not the arbiter of all behavior.

    screen shot of blog being blamed

    This is what I object to.

    See, nobody, including Nicole, blames me for what appears on The Nation. I don’t run The Nation and she knows it. That’s because the person who runs it is very open about who she is. I don’t get blamed for what appears on Lisa’s page. Everyone and their brother knows it’s Lisa’s page.

    But these other anonymous pages are different. They do shit and I get blamed. Notice how Mendy Smallwood believes that the person running that page is also writing this blog? I know the page itself calls itself “blogger,” but Mendy mentions that she’s going to “report the FB page” as well. She clearly thinks that the person running that page is me.

    I get tired of this. I get so sick and tired of it.

    Blame me for what I do. Do not blame me for stuff I didn’t do and wouldn’t do and object to in the first place.

    The person who runs that page has done this more than once. I have objected more than once. I get blown off every time. My patience is running out. When I objected this time, the person who runs the page made a little teeny comment about how she isn’t me, buried in the thread. I objected some more. She then made a post about it, I think. And finally, she took the whole thing down. That’s fine, but it should never have been up in the first place. She needs to take the word “Blogger” off that page description. She is not a blogger. She runs a FB page. It’s not a blog.

    I don’t like having to make these disclaimers but I see no other way to distinguish between my writing and the loonies. And they are loonies.


  12. but I agreed with the assessment the page posted.

    And that isn’t the point and isn’t the reason I commented here.


  13. I absolutaly see your point Sally, I was the 1st one on that thread to link to your blog without thinking of that consequence. In the future would you prefer I didn’t link to it on other pages or should I include a a disclaimer? I do feel what you say is very important to the narative.

    I’m sorry I was the cause of some angst.


  14. I hate it when people fall into Nicole’s trap. She likes to pretend that she knows everything there is to know about Facebook, but she doesn’t know how to disable the “share” option. She was counting on someone to do this. It didn’t really matter who did it, but it’s completely unfair that Sally gets the blame for it. In addition, I hate giving Nicole what she wants.

    I think today is court for Nicole. She’s going to get what she wants. Hardees. Attention. Wasting time so she can be the put-upon star of her own delusions.

    I doubt this will make a bit of difference to Nicole and Joe, plus it’s too long. They won’t read it.


    “On such technological advancement is morphed imagery. “‘Morphing’
    refers to a software process in which one image is transformed into another
    over a period of time.”

    Morph programs are used to generate images that are presented to people who have suffered brain damage (various areas) to assess and demonstrate whether or not they can learn to distinguish same-different, or at what rate. All of which is affected by the area damaged, the amount of damage, etc.

    “Increasingly, human subjects are tested using computer-automated methods. A particularly powerful approach is the “touchscreen” testing method, in which subjects respond directly to stimuli on a computer screen (e.g., Robbins et al. 1994). The advantages of this method are numerous and include facilitated performance due to contiguity between stimuli and responses and the ability to present a battery of different cognitive tests in which parameters such as stimuli, responses, and feedback are consistent across tasks and conditions.”


  15. I don’t post pictures of my kids very often at all on my own FB page. I get shit from my in laws for it and I tell them it’s because 1-No one needs to know what we’re doing but us. We’re doing activities, not other people, therefore it’s no one’s business. 1-Perverts. Yea, I have it locked down tight and only have people I actually know on my friends list but I respect my kids’ privacy. I post pictures here and there but they’re pretty vague, dark lite, etc.; the back of them running through a corn maze, the back of them riding a bike or horse away from me. I rarely post their faces. Why would I need to post pictures of them? The people who love us get to see them and their cute faces, nothing is better than real life. Unless you’re Nicole and real life is miserable, dirty, and just shitty.


  16. I don’t think the occasional portrait type picture of a kid is a terrible thing. The pics and video that might come back to haunt them are the ones where the kids are filthy and living in squalor. Can you imagine being a kid or young adult, hanging out with peers and have someone bring up seeing that? I know the Nauglers don’t do that sort of social thing right now but who knows what the future might hold?


  17. I have to say this, because this is seriously bothering me. I follow all you guys, blogs and facebook. It’s the train wreck you can’t look away from. Lately, I see you all turning against each other. Disclaiming responsibility for what each page or blog posts. Circling the wagons when the heat is on (and yet there is always one wagon who doesnt fit) I personally think this is a mistake. Each page, and admin is responsible for what it posts. I admit that I cringed when I saw the page post that picture. I admire your standard Sally, as regards that. I also think that page is much tamer, and more thoughtful in its posts than others. I feel that, even if you disagree with a certain page post, and all of a sudden all other pages are making sure toSHOUT AT THE ROOFTOP THAT IT ISN’T THEM, is harmful to the cause at hand.
    And that cause is the children’s safety, and trying to make sure the big hearted people in the world aren’t fooled again by their grifting and false “testimonies”. I would do anything I possibly could for those children . I wouldn’t piss on j and n if they were on fire. But the constant (lately) covering our own asses, and defensiveness, is seriously turning me off. And I’ve been watching all of this from the very beginning. Quietly.
    Please stick together as a United front. You don’t have to agree with everything the others do. “Imho”, if you want to continue being taken seriously, you can’t have dissention in the ranks….


  18. One other thing sally….I love the hell out of your blog. Your insight, intelligence, knowledge, ability to make us all understand things (such as farming) that is so far beyond our particular lives…you have a real talent. If I have to hear about the blessed little excursion one more time, I’m going to scream. We get it! Stop feeding her! I’m my eyes…the constant defense of that day….lessons the truth of the event. N needs to defend her actions. You do not. I long for more of your research, your knowledge, and your insight . You are brilliant. Get back on track. Love….


  19. I understand why you posted Sally. This is just Nikkers teying to throw shade at you. Anyone with any sense knows that if you had a comment to make, you would make it and not hide behind an anonymous page. I think your position is clear and your point has been made.

    We dont all have to agree on wvery subject that gets discussed. I have had positions contrary to yours before. You have been respectful to me even though we saw things differently. I dont think the Blessed One understands that just because we agree on SOME things, doesnt mean we agree in EVERYTHING.


  20. And that cause is the children’s safety,

    No, it isn’t. It might be your reason for being here, but it’s not mine. I just don’t like liars.

    Please stick together as a United front.

    No. That is why this blog exists in the first place, because I was told, in those exact words, that I had to present a united front, like we’re some sort of army, in “collusion.” We’re not.

    I cannot and absolutely will not sit back and be blamed for something horrible that somebody else did just so we present a “united front.” Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it, and that includes me.

    I will say this. I know that here for the last little bit, I’ve been doing a bit of reacting and I don’t like being in that place. I’ve been horrifically busy with Nathan’s website (it’s getting a complete facelift, and I have to learn how and it takes me time), and that’s just the way it is for right now.

    Subjects on the back burner are 1) an update on the littlest calves, 2) an update on Shadow the new donkey, and 3) a piece on sous vide, which is the BOMB. I promise I will get to them soon. Oh, and 4) more about Cleo’s estate.


  21. I’m sorry I was the cause of some angst.

    You didn’t do anything that I saw as a problem. Link to this blog anytime you wish. I have no problem at all with that. The blog is here and it is what it is. What I didn’t like was them thinking that I was behind that other page.


  22. I don’t post pictures of my kids very often at all on my own FB page

    I’m with you, Jane. Nathan pre-dated social media, so I never dealt with the issue, but yeah. That would be my own position if I were placed magically back into parenting (please NO).


  23. Sally, the word collusion is a little hard to stomach. No one suggests that you support anything that goes against your beliefs. My point was, (I hope) that all the back peddling and defensiveness is turning off your “followers”. Me, at least. Your last two posts support that feeling, for me. It is indeed “your blog. Go make your own”. I’m honest to a fault. It gets me in trouble at work, quite often. I’d like to see more of your life (it’s amazing) your knowledge (epic) and your research (too lazy to do it myself). You guys…..all of you…stopped the moving train…In “collusion”…..of grifting. Disagree with how others do things all you want. As a group, whether you like it or not, you have made a difference. And “army”? I am the founder of an “army” after a five year old boy was murdered in family foster care in my very small rural community. We are now a 501c3 org. I’ve been at every court date . We have provided beds and clothes and aupplies to his surviving sisters (lives in same house. Beaten beyond what you would want to know). I never met that boy, not any of his family. We have scholarships . We bought his headstone . (I live in ny
    A woman from texas sonated the most money ) We created two memorial sites. An “army” did that. We turned on each other from time to time. things get and got ugly. The point is….focus. and yea, the childrwn are my focus, I’d they aren’t for you…..what the hell is? Liars ? Get back on track Sally. You were awesome.
    Blessings and prayers for you, Dave and Nathan. I do love you all.


  24. what the hell is? Liars ?

    Yeah. Liars. Joe threatened to sue me for having an opinion and then Nicole went after my son. That’s enough to earn my contempt forever.


  25. To whoever is reading comments here:
    I took the share down. Facebook did not remove it, Sally didn’t tell me to remove it. I removed it of my own accord.

    For the record, again: Sally Davis is not One Flew. She has never been an Administrator or Editor or at all a part of my page. She doesn’t even comment on it. I am also not Al, or Lisa, nor Debra. I am also not stupid, or loony.


  26. I have a FB page, and a grand total of around 60 friends. They are siblings, friends I went to high school or college with, friends in know in “real” life, mixed in with a few that I became friends with via other blogs or message boards. If someone is not a friend, they cannot see my posts. Even so, I only occasionally posted pictures of my child when he was a minor. The main reason, as he got older, was because he didn’t want me to. Much as I loved to brag about my child, he didn’t like it so I didn’t do it.

    Now, if he had been the sort of kid who didn’t care, I would have shared more pictures of him over the years but still kept it limited to friends and family. Nicole shares this with whoever wants to stop by her FB page and take a look-see. I would not be comfortable knowing that strangers could be looking through my photos, digging around for personal information, etc. Of course, I don’t rely on strangers sending me money so I can support the bazillion children I have, plus my worthless husband (note: I have no husband, but if I did, he would not be a lazy, worthless, illiterate jackass. Nicole – you win the prize in that department!).

    Sadly, Nicole thinks having a husband, any husband, is better than being single. So she has settled for Joe, and this choice has resulted in her having way too many children, living in a garden shed, pooping in plastic buckets, and having to work to death just to get enough money together to buy cans of mystery food. But hey, she’s got a worthless husband! Wheee!


  27. As an aspiring CISSP I can say there are some very real risks to posting very candid pictures of one’s kids. Heck, taking pictures of your kids, vacations, projects and hobbies is nothing new. It was just a whole lot more hard-copy based before 2002. The risk of a hard-copy picture of a kid falling into dangerous hands was not insignificant but it was a lot harder and more costly to replicate the image and spread it around. Now the risk of replication is a lot more significant because we have a web-enabled camera with us almost all the time and Facebook provides a very willing platform. There are plenty of people who think of Facebook is a written and photographic diary platform and that only their intimate friends are allowed to see. Nothing is further from the truth. Most of the time I can figure out the exact grid location that a posted photo was taken. It’s a matter of location services that we all love. Frankly, I tend to think of Facebook as the burglar’s friend.

    Nicole likely knows this and doesn’t care. I don’t believe she loves her kids. She uses them and pimps them out to get money. Nicole knows that most all of her stuff is not private and knows that more ‘friends’ you have the less secure your thoughts, comments and pictures are on the Facebook platform. She doesn’t care because her object is to get people to give up their money to her. She’ll use mud and cleanliness, outrage and sympathy to get people to part with their money. Her kids are purely means to that end and if they get hurt because she doesn’t care, she will never own her part in her kids getting hurt. In fact, all she has expressed is indignation that she was held accountable. Plus she gets a serious high from getting attention and with however many ‘followers’ she has that she really doesn’t know on Facebook she deludes herself into thinking she is something significant. Heck, Nicole probably thinks her indiscriminate internet kid images pimping is a sort of an achievement.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.