Genesis, Part 1

In the beginning, Mark Zuckerberg created Facebook.

At first, Facebook was without world-wide exposure. In fact, Facebook was restricted to a few college campuses. Zuckerberg’s original vision was of something that would connect college students. He didn’t see it connecting everyone.

In those long-ago days, you had to be a college student to even access Facebook.

Rebecca Phillips Ketchie was one such college student. Doing graduate work, in 2005, she started a Facebook group called “Bob Jones University survivors.”

She thought it would attract grad students, or transfer students, and let them connect. The word “survivors” was never intended as a pejorative – like “surviving a tornado” or “surviving mistreatment.” It was tongue-in-cheek, like the t-shirts sold in shops along the Alaska Highway—”I drove the Alaska Highway and survived.”

And it did attract some people. And everything rocked along fine for a while, but Facebook became a phenomenon not just of college campuses, but across the nation and then around the world.

And in a matter of just a few years, Rebecca realized she needed some help. For one thing, the number of participants had multiplied beyond anything she ever expected, or even desired. For another, the entire tone of the group had changed.

Intended as a place where former students could laugh about the “good old days” when they were younger, things changed as the Disaffected began to show up. In short, Camille and the Court (in the form of St. Catherine, David Shaffer, and Dan Keller) arrived. Many threads were diverted to BJU-bashing instead of reminiscing.

Rebecca asked a few people to help her do moderation. Among those were Phil Lehman, Nancy Kepler Bean, Hannah Goodman and Leah Hayes.

Here’s the basic story. Cathy Harris joined an ongoing conversation about counselors at BJU questioning guys about whether or not they masturbated. She told her oft-repeated story of having been counseled by Walt Fremont and having Fremont ask her the same question.

A forum member named Alex (I forget his last name and can’t find anyone who remembers it) objected, saying that Walt was dead and it just wasn’t fair to accuse somebody who couldn’t defend himself. Cathy took umbrage. Camille entered the fray, in defense of Cathy.

During the argument that ensued, Alex told Camille that he was going to return in an hour and post something that he knew about Grant.

Camille went completely apeshit and began yelling loudly for somebody to ban Alex, and remove the comment. She insisted that Alex was alluding to some sort of sexual indiscretion on Grant’s part. I wonder why she assumed that?

Alex said that if they removed it, he would simply post it on the net elsewhere, which resulted in all sorts of unhappiness. (I sort of understand how Alex felt. Tell me that you’re going to remove something I said, and watch how I react.)

After the allotted hour, Alex came back with his “story.” It seems that he’d seen Grant going into chapel one day, putting a stick of chewing gum in his mouth. [For the uninitiated, chewing gum on the BJU campus was a major no-no.  I don’t know if that’s still the case, but it sure was in my day.]

That’s the bare bones story. The entire thread was ultimately deleted and no screen shots remain that I know of.

Here’s Cathy’s take on it in the form of a “note” on her Facebook page:

Take note: Cathy’s encounter with Fremont occurred in 1983 when she was 18 years old.

David Reese says that the alleged “letter from Berg” is “unbelievable.” I totally agree. It is.

Below, she tells all about how Alex was bad and Leah (who was trying to moderate this little squabble) was bad.

Alex, after discussing the matter privately with Leah Hayes, agreed not to put the thread/argument back up, but allowed it all to just disappear.

Cathy says, “You know me well enough, Leah, that it take[sic] a whole lot to get me really, really angry.” Actually, it takes very little to get Cathy riled. Just one simple phrase will put her in near hysterics: “I don’t believe that, Cathy.” Try it and see.

The best I can figure out is that the incomprehensible phrase Cathy put here is supposed to be either Russian or Ukrainian swearing. This was during the period when she had “found” Elizabeth and Ed Tozar, her fake parents, and they were supposedly illiterate in English (except when “Ed” wrote a totally plagiarized essay in perfect English).

Please notice this. I’ve snipped it to emphasize it.

She’s clear here. At the beginning of her remarks, she emphasizes that she was talking about something that occurred in the 1980’s. That would have been when she was a young freshman student at Bob Jones University.

Cathy told this version of the story in 2010. She says she was an 18-year-old freshman at BJU, and was “forced” into counseling sessions with Walt Fremont and he asked her if she masturbated.

Three years later, though, she tells the same story and it’s changed:

The link is to a blog entry made the same day that she posted it on GRACE’s Facebook page.

In this version, Fremont is talking with her, not as an 18-year-old freshman student, but as a 13-year-old child. Note that she specifically says the “masturbation” incident occurred “years before.”

I wish, while Cathy is lying about Walt Fremont, she would at least learn to spell the man’s name.

Genesis, Part 2

0

Boosts

I want to put this here just for the record.  It helps date it, for one thing.

It’s not a huge deal to me if Nicole boosts posts on her pages.  I don’t care.

I really don’t think anyone cares.

Certainly, if she actually boosts posts on her grooming page, I get that. I think it’s a silly waste of resources, but whatever she wants to do is her business.

But what I’m interested in is this.

Aside from 1-2 post last year for NCN and one test post on BLH this year I think, the only posts I boost are on BLGC.

Frankly, I think it’s been quite a bit more than 1 or 2 boosts on NCN and only one on BLH, but that doesn’t matter, either.

You see, this makes her claims that she is just trying to live her life and she doesn’t want all this notoriety and why can’t people just leave her alone completely bogus.  Totally bogus. Of course, this is something I already knew.

You see, Blessed Little Homestead, the Facebook page, is not a business of any kind. It’s just Nicole and Joe pretending to be homesteaders and sharing all sorts of personal information in detail about everything they do and don’t do.  That’s all it is.  And really, it was just to share stuff with close friends and family.

And NCN is her supposedly personal page, only somehow Facebook wouldn’t let her have a personal page and forced her to make it into a “like” page and really it’s just her personal stuff.  That’s all. Just her personal posts, stuff that interests her, you know, like how awful the police are.

If all that is true, then why is she paying money to boost them?

I pay money to have this blog. It’s not very much.  I suspect it’s not any more annually than the $20/month she says she spends boosting stuff on her grooming page.  So why do I do that?

I do it because I want to do it.  I like to write this blog, and I blog about all sorts of things, as everyone who reads here knows. I can afford to do it.  It doesn’t affect my bottom line even slightly.

But I don’t pretend that this is just my personal space and I am not writing to an audience. I am, and I know I am.  I do not pretend that I am writing this blog and just want everyone to leave me alone and let me just write and don’t say negative things to me and if you do you’re mean and stalking me.

By definition, a blog is public.  Yes, there are ways to make it private, if you were blogging, say, about a trip or something and you only wanted a limited group of people to see it, but generally that’s not what people do. This one is not like that. It’s public. I’ve never pretended otherwise.

But Nicole has.

I haven’t even saved the numerous comments by her humpers saying that all the Nauglers want is to be left alone. They just want people to go away and leave them in peace.

So why does she pay money to boost those posts on those two pages?

There is only one reason she pays money to boost posts on her grooming page.  She wants more dogs to come through her front door and get groomed.  Or alternatively, she wants it to appear that that is what she wants. But regardless, it’s a way of advertising.

That is what boosting a post on Facebook is for. Advertising. Increasing the number of people who see it. Spreading the word. Getting attention.

Why do that with a supposed personal page?  Why do it with a page that really is just intended to share stuff with your close friends and family?

It’s the exact opposite of wanting to be left alone.

0

Playing Games

As many of you know, I have a Facebook page called Blessed Little Blog.

It exists for only one purpose:  to serve as a place where I can post a link to new articles on this blog. Some people follow this blog via WordPress and get an email when there is a new article.  Some people prefer to follow by being notified by Facebook. Either way works.

What I won’t do is get drawn into debate on the Facebook page.

I created this blog off of Facebook in the first place for a reason.

Facebook is a free platform. It’s a private company.  It has its own rules. Sometimes they are reasonable. Sometimes they are incomprehensible to me. But the truth is that people can, and do, engage in a whole lot of game-playing on Facebook.  People report a comment and Facebook takes it down.  Then they are retaliated against, and the goal becomes taking them down.  Back and forth, forever.

One of Nicole’s leghumpers came to the Blessed Little Blog Facebook page last night.

After making a lengthy comment full of questions, she went back to Nicole and reported in.

Holy run-on sentence, right?  But she makes it sound like she just really doesn’t understand and really wants to.  She’s tired of negativity, so she hangs out endlessly on Nicole’s pages, because it’s all so positive there.

It took me a minute or two to process what was happening.  For the record, nobody was rude to her. A couple of other people commented.

Here’s what was going on.

This comment was made about two hours before she came to my page and started with the “I just want to understand” stuff.

She, of course, didn’t want to understand anything.

She wanted to provoke either me or somebody else into making a comment or two or three that Nicole and company could then report to Facebook and get my page taken down or reprimanded or something.

It’s the Facebook game.

I took most of that exchange down.

This is what she had to say right after she reported back to Nicole about her bravery.

I thought about all this for a bit.

I do not want discussion of any kind on that Facebook page.  I do not want to have to worry about it.  I just want a place where I can post links to articles that are here. Anyone who wishes to comment, and that includes Stacey Tiano, can do so if they want, but they need to do it here, off Facebook.

So I had to figure out a way to stop comments.

It took me a little while to do that, but stop them I did.  If you comment on the FB page, you’ll think that your comment went through.  It will look to you like it did.  It will also look like it did to your friends.

But it didn’t. Nobody else can see it, so don’t bother doing it.

Come here. Comment away. Disagree with me vehemently if you wish. Be reasonable and polite. Think before you type or at least before you hit enter.

But let’s avoid the Facebook games.

UPDATE:

Let me explain something to you, Stacey.

Whoever replied to you was me, Stacey.

Why do you think that you’re so special that you can come pepper me with questions and have me take time to answer every one of them?  Why should I do that?  Why should I bother, especially when I have already answered them fifty bazillion times right here on this blog?  Are you not capable of reading?

If you already know everything, why did you ask?

You didn’t ask because you wanted information, did you?  If you want to know something, you just ask Joe or Nicole, right?  So why ask me?

 

0