Vanzant Replies to the Rumormongers
This thread is closed to anyone other than Janet Vanzant and the blogmaster. Any interlopers who comment here will be deleted immediately. Okay, Mrs. Vanzant... the ball is in your court. I've done all that's humanly possible to be fair and impartial, and the rest is up to you. Take it away, and "wow" us!
posted by J. Kendrick McPeters | 10:58 PM
4 Comments:
J. Kendrick McPeters said...
To Mr. Mcpeters
Nita, you said:
Mr. McPeters anonymous had a point when he/she said that it was obvious where your loyalties are because Mrs. Van Zant has been talked about on this site and the two cents site quite viciously and you did not see the need jump to her defense. I think that makes your point very clearly.
Let me make my point as clearly as possible: I would be absolutely delighted for Vanzant to show the same kind of intestinal fortitude as her opponent, and come to this blog and rebut each and every allegation made against her. I guaran-damn-tee you that I'll give her unlimited space to do so. I'll even start a new thread:
"Vanzant Replies to the Rumormongers"
And if anyone -- anyone -- posts in that thread besides Janet Vanzant, I'll delete their comments immediately.
Well Mr. Mcpeters seems you can't uphold your word and it is now truly obvious why you set up this blog site, why don't you just rename it go ahead and bash Vanzant wiht anything you can think of and make up. Long title but more accurate.
the statement referred to above was made by Mr. Mcpeters on Monday, July 10, 2006 11:05:26 PM under E-mail topic: Should the County Ambulance Service be giving 'free rides' as they currently are to County employees??
I must plead guilty to not watching the blog 24/7. If I had nothing better to do, maybe I'd have noticed the offending post from "not janet." But, in fact, I read the blog by email, and I didn't even know which topic that cryptic comment was posted under.
Look, here's all I had to go on:
From: not janet [anonymous-comment@blogger.com]
To: mcpeters@usit.net
Subject: [Giles Free Speech Zone] 8/01/2006 08:04:15 PM
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-ELNK-Info: spv=0;
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=00; sbw=000;
X-NAS-BWL: No match found for 'anonymous-comment@blogger.com' (54 addresses, 0 domains)
X-NAS-Language: English
X-NAS-Bayes: #0: 1.61404E-149; #1: 1
X-NAS-Classification: 0
X-NAS-MessageID: 4137
X-NAS-Validation: {8659653F-67A5-47FC-85F5-EC0E6871CF22}
i bet you thought this was going to be Janet. Well, no such luck. fooled you.
--
Posted by not janet to Giles Free Speech Zone at 8/01/2006 08:04:15 PM
Okay, if I didn't have to read about 50 to 60 posts per day, and reply to many of them, I might have gone to my web browser, loaded up the blog, and looked for that comment. Then I'd have known that it was posted in a taboo area, and I'd have deleted it immediately.
Have I done this before? Yes, I certainly have. I've deleted two inappropriate comments from that particular thread. There was a poster who spammed a very long anti-Vanzant screed onto about five threads, including the one reserved for Vanzant. I deleted each and every one of those postings. (Strange that I'd do that, if I'm only interested in attacking Vanzant.)
By the way, I launched the blog late in May, and did not make up my mind to vote for Gordon until early in July-- after he answered my questionnaire. So, it's pretty dopey to claim that I set up this blog simply to bash Vanzant.
As far as keeping my word, I believe that my past actions in deleting comments in the "Vanzant only" thread proves that I've done just that. The fact that this little one or two line remark slipped by me is unfortunate, but there were circumstances beyond my control. You see, I'm generally about a day behind in following the blog, and today was even worse. Today was my mother's 50th wedding anniversary, and I spent more time with her today than usual as a consequence. Even under the best of circumstances, I can't just obsessively watch the blog, and today I had even less time than I normally do. But, if I'm too slow and uninvolved of a blogmaster, please start your own blog and show us how it should be done. Okay?
Finally, you yourself have violated the rules by posting in this "Vanzant only" thread. And that put me in an interesting position-- if I followed my own policy, I'd have to delete your posting. On the other hand, I also have a policy to answer criticisms, rather than delete them. So, which policy do I choose to follow (knowing that someone will complain no matter which choice I make)?
I decided to leave your comments up, so that I could answer them. I know that violates the "Vanzant only" rule, but the fact is, it's been three weeks now, and I've not heard a peep from her. Considering that the election is tomorrow, I think it's a safe bet that she's not going to take advantage of this forum. So, I might as well leave your comment up, and answer you here, as well.
But the original comment from "not janet" is toast, just like I promised. Happy now?
That is such a crock Kendrick you have plenty of time to reply to what you want and if you can't see what thread topics are posted under why did you even say you would keep an eye on it. The above blogger is right it has always been clear what this blog is for.
Post a Comment
<< Home