There was an exchange on the Nation (FB page) yesterday. One of Nicole’s humpers came over to play.
And play is the correct word.
Feigning ignorance, in spite of having followed the Naugler saga for two entire years, she began by asking a question about the Nicole/Pate interaction recording from when the children were taken.
I provided those two links.
Elizabeth then made it clear that she didn’t want to read anything on the blog.
Here is the gist of that exchange on the Nation. It’s long, so I’m omitting much of it and just including the stuff that involved me and Elizabeth directly and/or comments that I think are germane to the issue. Here’s the link if you want to go read the whole thing.
After carrying on about how she can’t find anything and doesn’t want to read the blog, she now begins to demand that she be spoon-fed this stuff. She wants me, essentially, to make a comparison between the edited version and the unedited version and provide her with a transcript of what was omitted and some analysis about it.
She’s trying really hard. . .
Here’s where she starts laying it on thick. Too thick. She’s confused. She can’t understand. She just wants to understand, because she’s Switzerland.
But then, just a bit later, she busy explaining that Joe and Nicole explain everything.
So which is it? She’s confused, or she’s not confused?
But digging is really, in fact, what she was doing.
So I tried.
And I didn’t see this question (about email addresses) until today. Here’s the answer, Elizabeth. I get a whole lot of spam. I probably get as much spam as I do actual real comments. To keep up with that, I utilize a spam filter.
One of the ways that spam filters work is by looking at email addresses. The filter does not check to see if the email address is real (you can use a fake email address here and it will work fine – a good many of you do that). It looks for known spam email addresses.
The spam filter saves me a lot of work trying to filter out spam.
She’s confused. Poor Switzerland.
So then, even though she’s uncomfortable with providing an email address to comment on the blog that she regularly reads but which somehow hasn’t done the job of adequately informing her so she remains confused, she wants to go to private messaging.
Before I continue with this, I want to make something clear about private messages.
I’m not fond of them.
I had a mentor years ago, a man named Farrell Till. A former pastor/missionary, he was probably the foremost authority in the world on the subject of errors in the Bible. He ran a mailing list called “Errancy” and I was a member for a very long time.
Farrell used to talk about how people would want to have private conversations with him. Occasionally, an active minister would come to his house to talk. Farrell was pretty much fine with that because it took some effort to actually visit him physically.
But he refused to do email exchanges.
His reasoning was that he could have an exchange or a debate with an inerrantist (Christian who believes the Bible has no mistakes) on the mailing list and that exchange would be seen by hundreds of people. He was under no illusion that he might change the mind of the inerrantist. He was interested in the debate, the exchange of ideas, and in mentoring people like me who were sincerely wanting to know.
That’s what happens on this blog. I get to express my point of view. I have the bully pulpit, just like Farrell did, because it’s my blog. But in the comment section, you all get to weigh in. Sometimes you agree with me, sometimes you don’t. Everyone gets to read it. You can use a screen name if you wish and many of you do.
Private messages accomplish almost nothing, and tend to be a waste of time at best. At worst, they are fraught with danger, because either side can selectively quote from them and nobody has any way of knowing what the whole exchange consisted of.
Because I strongly suspected that Elizabeth was trolling, I accepted her request. And I was proved correct in my assessment. I’ll show you how I know that.
Here is the exchange. I’m putting it out here for only one reason. She was trolling. She was totally disingenuous and her sole motive was to get me or somebody else to say something that could be used somehow by Nicole against that person. I do not honor privacy in a case like that.
Two red flags popped out immediately.
First, why the shit about the dead child? I never mentioned Nathan. She supposedly doesn’t know anything about anything. She’s confused. Yet that was the first thing out of her keyboard. It was the first comment she made because she thought it would disarm me. It didn’t. It armed me instead.
Second, she has no questions. She needed to go to PM to talk with me but she has no questions.
Anything you can tell me. . .
So she begins by blasting away at Debra. She wants me to say something about Debra.
Nicole wants me to say something about Debra.
I wasn’t born yesterday.
And we’re back to explaining how she just wants to ask questions only she doesn’t have any.
Frankly, I do not think that Elizabeth was prepared for this at all. She never expected to connect with me publicly much less privately.
She, of course, has no questions.
Ah, she came up with a question. Vague, loaded, expansive, but a question.
I gave her fair warning, as you can see. I put the whole thing on the blog because fuck it that is what I do when people try to intimidate me.
It was time for me to ask a question, a specific one. Not some vague thing. A real question.
Notice the vague answer?
When I followed up, she suddenly was busy.
This was yesterday evening. My comment about going to feed the calves was real. That means that exchange ended at approximately 7:15 p.m. Central time yesterday.
And that was that until today.
Elizabeth, having failed to get anything useful out of me, went back to the Nation. Again, I am not including every single comment, but they are all there if you want to go read.
Please note the time. I took these screen shots just a little while ago. It is now noon Central time.
She goes back and starts arguing with Deb. The whole purpose of this was to get anyone she could to argue with her. She wanted to get somebody angry so she could get either a nice screen shot or information.
I’m so easily confused. . .
Sure. And you’re Switzerland.
You just read our whole PM exchange.
What were her questions? Vague shit about four people. Anything I wanted to tell her, she said.
Elizabeth makes more than one reference to her shitty past behavior.
And here’s the comment about how she saw people drive by the shop and yell threats and take pictures. She has no video of that. She’s easily confused, she says. But she knows for certain this happened.
I bet she knows for certain that Joe didn’t drink a beer and that we were all drunk that night, too.
You know, if I’d said that about somebody and then sincerely wanted to establish dialogue with them, I think I’d have skipped the “nobody should say shitty things about dead children” part and gone straight to “I was wrong to say that I thought you should be smacked in the face with a shovel.”
In addition, there’s something else here.
Lisa quite often adds “IMHO” or “IMO” (in my humble opinion, in my opinion) to stuff she writes.
Elizabeth, though, doesn’t follow any of this very much and stays confused. She doesn’t even know why Lisa is in Nicole’s crosshairs. Yet she is very aware of that little habit of Lisa’s.
Here’s another gem, from last May.
So, taking all of this into consideration, and figuring that I’d gotten all I was going to get out of her, I did this.
She responded with “What did I do?” in a matter of about ten seconds. Yet she had spent the entire morning arguing on the Nation and not asking me any of those burning questions that she needed answers to because she’s Switzerland.
Well, Switzerland, since you read every word written here about Nicole, there’s your answer.
This is why I typically won’t respond much, if any, to private messages. It’s why I’m typically vague even if I do respond. It’s why I vastly prefer having public exchanges.
I blocked Elizabeth so I don’t have to be bothered with her again.