There are many ways to shut down rational discussion, one of which is by unsupported accusations, as follows. Another one is by bringing the conversation to an antagonistic debate with no winners because there's no verifiable information to those on the sidelines. Another is by "triangulating" (example below) by splitting the debate into pro or con of "me -- or her!"
It's selfish, and there are some narcissistic elements in this one. this is not a team player. In the interchanges (boxes below) one can read two posters: Joe P. and "Investigating Family Curts" who is the cheerleader, reflecting an off-line liaison.
Until Mr. Pilchesky can make up his mind whether this is a public forum or his personal platform to get at his wife, with the help of his "paramour" (his words), I think on-the-topic, rational discussion may have to happen elsewhere, and I have better things to do with my awake thought-life than deal with it.
And I don't want to continue contributing to the daily "hits" and promote the site. I've saved most of my own postings on it anyhow.
RE: Below posts from March, 2012:
If Joanne did silence a full 2,700 posters (any number of which may have been multiple personalities/usernames of Joe, or maybe were not -- but we don't know which) -- this number may have been matched by previous postings of smut, chauvinist remarks to dissidents (including myself), and attempts to derail the conversation through changing the topic to the relationship between the sexes.
There is indeed a major thread missing on the forum -- the Kids 4 Cash thread, a huge one, which talks about Danielle Ross and has posted some of her details. I also believe that Joanne was afraid that this thread might have been trashed or deleted by Joe once he got a court order to regain access to the forum, post PFA where he was thrown out of his residence = her house.
I believe it will surface again, but if people were activist enough, they'd have processed the information, saved what mattered to them, and figured out a way to act on it. Maybe several did!
No one likes to believe one has wasted one's time disseminating links and info (case the bread upon the waters, etc.) and I don't think I did -- but there are ways to cut one's losses. Hopefully one gets better and faster at this with time, which helps with business success. Theoretically.
Exhibits first, summary, below:
What we have below is an interchange between what appears to be the current king of the mountain and Scranton Political Times (a message board, forum in existence since 2005 -- not without a legal fight to get it back up after it was improperly shut down, either).
In late 2011, the Pilchesky domestic matters came to a head, and while it's been portrayed as a blow-for-blow engagement, I don't believe that's the best description.
I got in the middle for only four months of this, and quit the forum (deleted my account) after reading this next post. There was more context behind it, but this is the basics. The "ROI" of staying involved simply wasn't high enough. And when dealing with this level of personality/"narcissism" (?), my idea is, don't further feed the thing!
(will extend beyond right margin....)
| Post Info | TOPIC: To the 2,700 posters who have been silenced by Joanne. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
Yes, there are only two roads in life. My way, or the highway, with insults....
Notice the cheerleading: "get on topic -- how do you feel about the 2,700 posters being deleted"? (where's the evidence of ##s? And face it -- plenty of those were Joe, plus Joe, plus Joe on-line).
FBI has been there. Federal lawsuits (2) have been filed, plus a civil lawsuit by Joe himself side-lined because of the FBI swoop-and-take.
The primary issue for the community is NOT which moderator is holding the moral upper ground (neither do; one does seem more sober-minded; but in fact one is awaiting and trying to defend herself against going to prison over elder abuse/fraud; felony charges -- for specifics, see the records (I may have not named the charges right, but Joanne is living separately, with (i think) her young almost adult son (not by Joe) and maintaining employment until she does, or doesn't, go to jail for a while). So other strong persons had better step up to the plate, without being entrenched in that battle.
Moreover, at some level, it's infantile tactics (that work!), with apparent calculating intent. joe is triangulating here -- forcing his followers to take a side, or to just ignore the accusations (= to enable).
It is possible -- for some people -- to hold a conversation that doesn't end with references to one's family jewels:
How many thousands of posters had "nuts," and how many had the corresponding female anatomy? >=2,000 men and <=700 women? Sure... Impressive reasoning. Maybe there are only 2 kinds of thinking..
Among other things, I went back and forth a few times over graphics like this, at least in the threads dealing with domestic relations issues, some of which involve (at times) allegations of sexual abuse of minors:
|
|
| ||||
Looking for it (just now) I found another one of a middle aged man posing with a T-shirt saying something about "Doherty Deceit" and he was in adult diapers, clutching a teddy bear. Yet another one was animated, of a tack piercing someone's thumb, i.e., 'Under (someone's) thumb" motif.' I'm a musician (i.e., requires use of fingers) and the image was very disturbing. Yes, this is free speech -- but forums are moderated, and this was too "immoderate." So I exercised free speech, got classified as a prude and read the private messaging saying, it had bothered others, too. . . . Another image (posted at the top) was black and white, with water gushing through a man's ear, his ear facing a dam, with his fingers plugged in it.
Is there somewhere inbetween the detached articulation of "Changing the Culture of Custody" and GALs as a Lifeline -- and this?
Just a personal decision -- enough!
Then there was at least one or two votes of confidence (afterwards) -- here's one:
Post Info
|
TOPIC: Federal Lawsuit against Danielle Ross, GAL filed in Lackawanna County. Judge Corbett's conduct is questioned.
|
|
Status: Offline
Posts: 21
Date: Mar 25 2:54 PM, 2012
|
RE: Federal Lawsuit against Danielle Ross, GAL filed in Lackawanna County. Judge Corbett's conduct is questioned.
Printer Friendly
MaMa Bear wrote:
Excellent article by the way. Thanks for that.
__________________
|
|
Status: Offline
Posts: 21
Date: Mar 25 2:53 PM, 2012
|
Printer Friendly
MaMa Bear, Obviously you have really been through the ringer with family court. Are you/your children still in the system?
You make a lot of really good points and I can completely understand your almost "paranoid" attitude towards the current federal lawsuit with Mike Stefanov vs Ross. The deeper I get into this the more distrustful I am becoming too. But - let me refer you back to my comments on this thread on March 19th regarding this lawsuit. This lawsuit is not about the outcome of the custody case or if the father or the mother in this case is/was the better parent. It is about the way that the system is designed to take advantage of divorcing families and their children, suck them dry of al of their finances, treat them like second-class citizens that don't know how to parent or take care of their own children etc. etc etc. It is about the lies and corruption that is occurring there and goes well beyond Danielle Ross (although she seems more than most to actually enjoy 'sticking' it to good, decent parents.) Trust me on this one MaMa Bear, THIS IS A GOOD THING FOR ALL OF US.
You are correct though that we have to stick together (a national issue) and become more knowledgable and work hard to prevent the already well entrenched money power and the rhetoric of the extreme father's rights groups. This is where our friend Wild Bill-Outlaw has been and will be the most valuable asset to us for all of the work she has done over the years.
|
(thanks! But that's now an off-forum asset).
SUMMARY:
I am in the business of publicizing -- for those able to receive it -- that ABC entities have designed XYZ collaborations to deprive sheeplike (in their eyes) individuals of their legal and civil rights (or, the legal and civil rights they imagined through years of being taught what America was they had).
And that if LMNOP people wish to want to do something about it before their kids, their work life and their social relationships are history -- Gone with the Wind -- then they had better attend RICO 101 (next up post) so when it crops up next in the neighborhood, they see it.
I am in the NAFCJ.net (Liz Richards), Cindy Ross, and Marv Bryer (Byer?), Richard Fine (in some aspects), Helen Grieco et al. (California NOW Family Court Report of 2002) and more recent publicists, for example -- in some (not all) respects, "Athena Phoenix" 66/34% effect.
We care less about the psychology than the money, the technical corporation status and tax returns and conflicts of interest. We understand many of the manipulative terminologies of the conspirators (they call themselves "collaborators," with pride, as in "Collaborative Divorce") are simply to flush out some federal funds, or private parties' funds. They manipulate emotions but (from what I can see) are themselves cold, hard, and calculating.
Their heart is one place, but before things get to the mouth, there is a translation device, so it comes out sweet, concerned, and interested in problem-solving.
I am referring to the leadership, the engineers of these policies. There are multiple levels of involvement, including probably sincere enablers who make a living within the ranks, and have been taught how to think, not having been forced by life how to think clearly in light of the long-term consequences of UNDERMINING DUE PROCESS for a personally desired "QUICK FIX" to the justice system. All is emotional appeal and paid-for, "promising practices," or, as it were, "evidence-based practices." The deck is stacked always by the funders.
As someone who's had to deal for years (and still is) with "dissemblers" and withholders, I like to put up data, WITH the links, (whether it's valid or not, others can decide or deduce on their own) and then respond to it (personal opinion), talk back. I also push myself to read and get exposure to as much data that may shed light on the situation as possible, from the "pro" "con" and "Children in the Middle" points of view. While the DV advocates push their language, and seek to train others in it (hey, a job's a job.....), they have failed to inform their "clients" (domestic violence victims) of the language of the opposition, or the layout of their encampments locally or federally.
And that leads to casualties. More casualties = more business for the advocates. As the word "ad-vocate" is to "speak to" or to "call to," I prefer people such as myself speak for ourselves.
POSTSCRIPT, APRIL 2012:
These are the last few comments, one day before April Fools' Day...
POSTSCRIPT, APRIL 2012:
These are the last few comments, one day before April Fools' Day...
| Post Info | TOPIC: To the members who believe that 2700 posters were real people | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
 |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
