So when Nicole creates a fake profile, it’s a “backup profile.”
When anyone else does it, it’s a “sockpuppet.”
She only uses hers, she says, to manage her pages.
I created that account because my personal page was under constant attack and I didn’t want to lose my FB pages.
See that? That’s why she created the sock. To prevent Facebook from taking down her pages. Oh, but that wouldn’t be her fault, of course. It wouldn’t be because she did anything wrong at all. It’s because of the “constant attacks.”
Just so we remember, here’s the Wiki, the one that she plagiarized on her new blog, telling us what a sock puppet is and what it is used for.
. . . to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website.
Get that? A sockpuppet, using the definition from the source that she herself copied word for word without attribution, says that what she did was create a sockpuppet. Not a “backup profile.” A sockpuppet.
Most of the socks that have been created by critics have been done in an effort to guard against the sort of attacks that Nicole is so good at either doing or instigating. Disagree with her publicly and it is open season on you. I know, because it happened to me. I know, because it continues to happen to me.
Just because we wanted out story to go public, does not give one a free pass to verbally and emotionally abuse my family and I.
Dear FSM, Nicole, please learn how to properly write. Nobody would say, “does not give one a free pass to verbally and emotionally abuse I.”
But beyond that, for the record, I have never verbally abused Nicole Naugler. I have never emotionally abused her. And I have never done one single thing, ever, to any of her children. I am more protective of her children than she is.
And yes, she and Joe actively sought to get their story “public.” Joe’s expression was “viral.” They got their wish. As a result, people, a whole lot of people, more than I imagined possible, are interested in the train wreck that is Joe and Nicole Naugler. So yes, we get a “free pass” to follow the story and comment on it. She gets to write whatever she likes. I get to write whatever I like. That’s the “free pass.” It’s called the First Amendment.
I have no obligation to share the events of my life, and when I do its on my terms.
Bingo. Nicole is under no obligation to share the events of her life, but when she does, she cannot control the blow-back she gets. That’s called “life.” She does not have to have the blow-back. Nobody is following her around (contrary to her silly claims). I have no access to information that she does not supply me with, or that is not publicly available.
But she doesn’t get to dictate the “terms.” The only voice she can control, legally, is her own.
Nothing I have done has been an attack. I have not stalked their homes, posted photos of their homes, businesss, or families. I have not created FB pages or websites to mock, degrade or defame them. I have not rallied people to personally attack them.
Really? Exactly what do you call this? I call it posting my address and a link to a Google image of my property, while mocking my dead child and “rallying people to personally attack” me.
I am not weak.
I am a fighter.
I wont back down.
Me, neither, chickie.
Plus how many socks do the haters have or have had?
Question asked by. . . a sockpuppet.
And then we have this astonishing attempt at spinning this.
Yes, Angela, I did post her address. On a post. Not a page dedicated to her. Not on a blog about her. I made a post.
I see. It’s different if you dox somebody on a Facebook post. That makes it better. That makes it okay. Especially if you do it to somebody who has never done anything of the sort to you.
It’s fine to go after somebody’s child on a Facebook post, especially if it’s somebody who goes out of her way to avoid showing your children’s faces. That’s fine.