There's a phone number on the Whois information? Anyone care to make the call?
Bureaucracy 3: Oh, so now you want to be part of the SOLUTION?
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
There's a phone number on the Whois information? Anyone care to make the call?
Um, I already have. About four times, about six weeks ago. All I heard was a somewhat faint and hard to hear voicemail message. I left messages but never got a return call.
Gus gave the number to me stating it was the number of his mechanic.
I brought this subject up with Cindy and Teppy via email this morning.
Last night I was grieving. I took Kimi's announcement at face value. I cared about the Gus I knew online and enjoyed him. But you know...I don't know one academic in the world that you can't find online. They all leave a trail. Somebody of Guy Straley's accomplishments should've been all over the place. I've only published two tiny books and you get 21,000 hits on my name (most of them me). Anybody who's building a goddam aspirin replicator in Europe ought to come up.
That somebody was making changes to the TV Tropes wiki under his name after his death with a half-assed story about why he was using that name? Very suspicious.
And just to remind you - Gus delurked right around the whole Schmoker/Anathema kerfuffle. ijs.
The whole dynamic is very similar to the Penlind fiasco, and other pseudicides I've seen and read about. That whole dynamic of bailing out on meetings because of an exotic incurable illness? Man, that's CLASSIC.
So, yeah. I was crying last night. Today...I'd like to be certain.
.
I think if people are grieving for the Gus they knew online, the Gus who made them smile or think or laugh, grieving is still appropriate -- even if it's only grieving for someone who wants to withdraw from the community.
And still? Giving to a charity is never a bad thing. If everyone here had unlimited resources, they'd probably be giving to charities all the time. And the thing is, it's not a requirement -- we weren't asked, we offered.
I won't delete this, but I think I should stay out of the discussion -- I don't know anything about schmoker / anathema / other name, and it sounds like that was a rough time for this community.
Schmoker/Anathema
Can someone give me a one-sentence summary of this? I was not around at the time.
For some of us it has been shocking; for others it immediately pinged their skeptical antennae. But it doesn't have to become personally divisive.
I'm with bon bon here. Immediately, I was sad. I still am. I also think outside confirmation is a good plan, and that thought didn't occur to me right away. It makes me sad that it did at all, but I think it's reasonable that it did. I think I followed Steph's path, more or less.
So, yeah. I was crying last night. Today...I'd like to be certain.
And David's.
And still? Giving to a charity is never a bad thing.
Absolutely true.
For me, I just don't want it to be under false pretenses.
So don't chip in.
I won't delete this, but I think I should stay out of the discussion -- I don't know anything about schmoker / anathema / other name, and it sounds like that was a rough time for this community.
Mieskie was the third name that person used. Basically somebody new came online, was an active poster. Was kind of rude and aggressive. Was told to settle down in-thread. Ultimately there was a two-week suspension, which the person circumvented with a pseud, leading to our first complete ban. It was very divisive and upsetting and we did lose some valued people in our community over it.