The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation deputy director Sherwin Smith is warning citizens to think before they start raising concerns about water quality because they could be charged with making terroristic threats. Smith told Maury County resident that unfounded complaints could be considered an “act of terrorism” and turned over the the police and the FBI. The meeting followed complaints about water quality in Mt. Pleasant, Tennessee where children have become ill drinking the water. That left residents with the sense that they were being given a Sophie’s Choice by the TDEC: live with sick children or face a possible charge of being a terrorist.
Smith warned residents “you need to make sure that when you make water quality complaints you have a basis, because federally, if there’s no water quality issues, that can be considered under homeland security an act of terrorism.” One audience member seemed to be in disbelief and asked “Can you say that again, please?” Smtih then repeated the warning.
The residents know something about terror. Joycelene Johns, 68, says that she has had no choice but to drink the cloudy, odd-tasting water for years. She added “I’ll drink it. but I pray before the first sip.”
The comments reflect a fear that the war on terror, like Saturn, inevitably devours its own. Criticism of the government is now viewed as a potentially terrorist act in our new society. The TDEC appears to be paraphrasing Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar: “The fault, dear Joycelene, is not in our water, But in ourselves.”
Of course, the worse thing is if Johns is arrested and water-boarded with the same contaminated water. The least they could do is use some bottled water so not to add insult to injury.
Source: Tennessee
AY,
And thank you for your perfectly expected and consistently immaterial response. BTW, any pain you’re experiencing is entirely your own. I stipulated that those ice cream headaches can be murder. C’est la vie.
_________________
RTC,
😀
Yeah! What about that guy?
Seriously though, what about that guy? He just vanished. Moved to solitary?
How about a black GB from Connecticut who’s been unfairly convicted ?
Gene,
Thanks for your delusional yet not unexpected response. I feel your pain.
Bron,
“Hopefully the people will rise up in 2014 and remove all of the existing congress and 1/3 of the senators and put in independents who are serious about the Constitution.”
We as a nation should be so fortunate.
AY,
You seem to forget that I not only know you outside this place, I know people who know you outside this place. I’m fairly certain your commenting on anyone’s character or trustworthiness is just the height of hilarity. And the irony of you calling anyone a bully after you got threatened with actual IRL legal action for bullying another poster is just oh so rich. But thanks for keeping your argument ad hominem and thus proving my point your original stance has no substance beyond your petty personal vendetta.
And to be clear, I didn’t threaten to personally ban anyone. I reminded them that the consequences of their actions could include banning and encouraged them to change their behavior before it got to that point. To wit:
It’s about the rules, AY. A loss of reading comprehension can be a terrible thing. Speaking of which . . .
As the Prof said, “I am the only person who can ban an individual and it takes a demonstrated history of racist or hateful comments or a refusal to comply with our civility rule.” Which, as has been explained, is precisely the behavior your buddy was being cautioned against: a refusal to comply with our civility rule. Or we could have simply let him march merrily headlong into a situation where he was banned without ever warning him at all that his behavior was running afoul of the rules. I don’t know about you, but when someone says “you’re about to step on that rattlesnake”, I usually avoid stepping on the rattlesnake. Not only that, but I’m usually appreciative of the heads up. I guess some like to go wave their foot in front of it instead. Natural selection is a harsh mistress. I would have thought you learned that by now. Some lessons are never learned.
BTW, your making an ad hominem argument in support of someone who ran afoul of the rules for persistently making ad hominem arguments in contravention of the civility rule is also pretty funny in itself.
I know it’s probably often hard to see through your ice cream induced sugar haze and the ice cream headaches can be murder, but do try to keep up.
Thanks for the laugh though.
AY:
honestly, there are more important things to worry about and to do something about. A failed president who looks like a clown to the rest of the world, rising utility bills from a mandated carbon tax, a possible war in Syria which could expand into a world war, domestic spying, a piss poor economy, out of control IRS, etc.
Hopefully the people will rise up in 2014 and remove all of the existing congress and 1/3 of the senators and put in independents who are serious about the Constitution.
Hamper the exercise of free speech……
What we don’t need is another blog bully….especially with admin powers… You see that’s what I’m really complaining about..
I don’t care what color, sex, male, female or religion so long as they are fair and equitable….I agree we need some balance…. And someone to appeal to directly… Even the FISA court has an appeal process…. But then again, too many rules may happier the exercise of free speech. It’s a tricky balance…..
nick:
we need some minority GB’s as well.
I am getting board with liberal, white males. They are so predictable. 🙂
nick:
does a clam have an a$$? I figure it has an a$$hole but an a$$?
I will also repeat what I’ve said, this blog needs 2 more Guest Bloggers, and they DESPERATELY need to be female.
Darren:
“I don’t let the customers decide what I buy or what I discontinue. I could but I choose not to.”
So then how do you make any money? You dont try to figure out what your customers want?
Dont you discontinue the items which arent selling? Isnt that directly related to what your customers want and dont want?
Darren,
Bingo… And when you have rules being enforced irregular based upon personality… You have issues brewing…. That’s what’s happening here and I object…. Nothing more nothing less… You believe what you do and I’ll believe based upon history of this blawg what I know… We can agree to disagree…..
Mike s.,
Thank you…. But, I will again say I didn’t think it deserved deletion…. It was not in moderation…. It was posted… Thank you for you honesty….
LK,
You have many valid points….
Nick,
Yep…
Gene,
An inconvienced truth…. Whatever you determine in the truth is your truth….you have no other truth…. As soon as you get over your anger issues you might amount to something good here…..
I stand by my original stance… You don’t possess the requisite character to have the power at this time because you can’t separate feelings from personalities…. And punish both that you don’t like…
Whatever else you wrote I didn’t read… Just being honest…. I don’t care what you have to say….. You are not to be trusted…. Base only upon your actions demonstrated here…as recently indicated…
You threaten banning and its not your call…. Didn’t you read the post by JT are don’t rules apply to you?
AY, I’m iced down, a bit less medicated, and ready to be your ally today. We have some superb Guest Bloggers but a “chain is only as strong as its weakest link.” And if you’re scatological AY, I’ll be happy to report on any bowel movements. Those opiates make your a$$hole tighter than a clam’s ass, and that’s water tight.
LottaKatz
You have a good point in some of the crowd psych about what can go on. But I experienced a situation that might offer some form of example. Sorry for using analogy, but it might be more clear in this case.
Back in the late 1980’s and probably until the mid 1990’s several friends and I would often go to this natural hot springs area near Steven’s Pass in WA. The property was owned by some doctors who essentially kept it open for anyone who wanted to make use of it. Fortunately it was not easy to get to, requiring a 45 minute hike up a steep hill to get to it and even then you had to know how to get there. It kept a lot of riff-raff out. Anyway, various people went up there and eventually constructed hot-tub like decks and pools for it. It was really a nice place to go.
The rules were pretty much DBAD, pack out what you bring in, and be cool and friendly to others. and clothing was optional. One nice aspect of it was once everyone was in the buff, everyone was equal in the sense that clothing and other social status issues didn’t matter. It was just people visiting.
A few years went by and for various reasons some people who were there more frequently decided to self-appoint themselves to be keepers of the ponds. Some minor incidents happened; minor such as trash and stupid stuff, and posted rules started to show up at the ponds, along with the self designated person who went by the name “crowbar”. I met him a couple times and he was an alright guy, but a bit let’s just say different. Soon much ado about nothing happened. I heard some talk there were some differences of opinion going on and things started getting more complicated and I suspect a power struggle started.
Then, something snapped. People were going up there and causing problems and being jackarses. The sheriff’s office got called up there a few times, then the politicians got a hold of it and went out to paint these hot springs as being some kind of dope infested orgy, and even made outlandish claims that the effluent from the water going past peoples’ bodies would pollute the water 30 miles downstream.
Around that time, some people decided to take revenge against the hot springs and went up there and totally trashed all the decks and the ponds themselves. When I saw the photos of that it must made my heart sink. But it didn’t surprise me. It seemed like just another example of something that was really good, free and special getting ruined by a few rotten eggs that can only make a mark by destroying something worthwhile.
Finally the property owners had enough and shut it down. That was a long time ago and I haven’t been back. Maybe it changed since but I don’t know.
So Lotta, I can see where you are coming from with some self-appointed irregulars can often lead to strife, but so can the laisez-faire behavior of an owner of in this case the property, this blog, or any other organization. That is why it is essential to a good organization to have persons who are delegated authority by the owner to act to prevent problems from turning into a meltdown and ruining it for everyone, including the owners. Because if there were no “moderators” or such this blog could really degenerate like many others do. I believe it is a good balance here. We don’t have the self-appointed police here as you are concerned with and we don’t have the authoritarian “ban all offenders” type of drama that goes with IRC or other places on the internet.
But the power-struggle issues need to stop because that can bring down an otherwise enjoyable organization. Any action taken must be definate and effective but it also must be legitimate and under the owner’s or the owner’s agent’s discretion.
LottaKatz
I understand what you are saying about not having proper designations for those who have administrative authority on a blog and that can cause some issues. Some blogs denote rankings on each user, such as guest; moderator; super-user; and owner. Those designations are often posted besides each person’s username. That might help but sometimes I think it creates issues where if users become infatuated with rankings it causes politics and intrigue in games people play when they effectively jocky for position.
You have a good point in some of the crowd psych about what can go on. But I experienced a situation that might offer some form of example. Sorry for using analogy, but it might be more clear in this case.
Back in the late 1980’s and probably until the mid 1990’s several friends and I would often go to this natural hot springs area near Steven’s Pass in WA. The property was owned by some doctors who essentially kept it open for anyone who wanted to make use of it. Fortunately it was not easy to get to, requiring a 45 minute hike up a steep hill to get to it and even then you had to know how to get there. It kept a lot of riff-raff out. Anyway, various people went up there and eventually constructed hot-tub like decks and pools for it. It was really a nice place to go.
The rules were pretty much DBAD, pack out what you bring in, and be cool and friendly to others. and clothing was optional. One nice aspect of it was once everyone was in the buff, everyone was equal in the sense that clothing and other social status issues didn’t matter. It was just people visiting.
A few years went by and for various reasons some people who were there more frequently decided to self-appoint themselves to be keepers of the ponds. Some minor incidents happened; minor such as trash and stupid stuff, and posted rules started to show up at the ponds, along with the self designated person who went by the name “crowbar”. I met him a couple times and he was an alright guy, but a bit let’s just say different. Soon much ado about nothing happened. I heard some talk there were some differences of opinion going on and things started getting more complicated and I suspect a power struggle started.
Then, something snapped. People were going up there and causing problems and being jackarses. The sheriff’s office got called up there a few times, then the politicians got a hold of it and went out to paint these hot springs as being some kind of dope infested orgy, and even made outlandish claims that the effluent from the water going past peoples’ bodies would pollute the water 30 miles downstream.
Around that time, some people decided to take revenge against the hot springs and went up there and totally trashed all the decks and the ponds themselves. When I saw the photos of that it must made my heart sink. But it didn’t surprise me. It seemed like just another example of something that was really good, free and special getting ruined by a few rotten eggs that can only make a mark by destroying something worthwhile.
Finally the property owners had enough and shut it down. That was a long time ago and I haven’t been back. Maybe it changed since but I don’t know.
So Lotta, I can see where you are coming from with some self-appointed irregulars can often lead to strife, but so can the laisez-faire behavior of an owner of in this case the property, this blog, or any other organization. That is why it is essential to a good organization to have persons who are delegated authority by the owner to act to prevent problems from turning into a meltdown and ruining it for everyone, including the owners. Because if there were no “moderators” or such this blog could really degenerate like many others do. I believe it is a good balance here. We don’t have the self-appointed police here as you are concerned with and we don’t have the authoritarian “ban all offenders” type of drama that goes with IRC or other places on the internet.
But the power-struggle issues need to stop because that can bring down an otherwise enjoyable organization. Any action taken must be definate and effective but it also must be legitimate and under the owner’s or the owner’s agent’s discretion.
Mike,
I think the outrage is over the second comment (which I never saw until it was in the trash). If it’s still there, you can see it’s basically a threat. I don’t know who yanked that one.
___________________
AY,
Of course it’s about you. It’s about something you said I didn’t do, namely go after rule violators if I liked them. I used to like you, but I did advocate for action to be taken about your previous rule violation. Which in turn pissed you off and is the root of your current vendetta which is entirely personal. Which brings us to the standards for dealing with persistent rule breakers again, which is – as I said – an open subject. You loved the rules when they protected you from Patty and yet when the rules protect someone else – in particular someone you don’t like personally – you get your knickers all twisted. Why is that exactly? That you want inconsistent rules in one breath and consistent rules in the next? Your argument is from not just a position of inherent contradiction as Darren pointed out, but multiple points of inherent contradictions. Personally, I prefer equal protection.
I’m certain policies will be worked out to deal with persistent rule breakers that fall shy of traditional moderation. As I said, in out of camera discussions – which try to stretch your mind to grasp this simply means conversations not held in open on the blog – the model as promulgated here is essentially self-moderating. By in large, it works very well. The rules are simple. There are only a scant few of them. If I or other GBs tell people when they are running afoul of the rules (and then usually only after they’ve displayed a pattern of behavior), for 99.9% of them, that’s all it takes.
However, rules without consequence are suggestions. The very limited force used to make a point to your new buddy came after many months of behavior that had be been attacking other posters and not GBs would have most certainly meant him meeting the nuclear option long ago. It was made because of his very vocal and very open refusal to follow the civility rule. No other reason. Not personalities. Not because of his choice in targets. Because he was not just breaking the rules, he was taking a whiz on them.
You wanted to bring pols into this? Well . . . isn’t that the exact basis of many of the complaints made about Washington? That they aren’t just breaking the rules but doing so brazenly? Free speech is a critical value and with the very few constraints the rules create (all of which comply with the established jurisprudence surrounding free speech), it is protected here more than any place on the Internet I can think of. People can advocate an position on any topic and are only subject to the scrutiny of other posters, not any predisposition of the blog owner or some corporate or partisan interest. People can have all the anonymous political free speech they want. We even let someone ramble on about bestiality without sanction. Why? Because he’s not attacking other posters, he’s not defaming other posters, he’s not threatening anyone with physical violence and he’s not inciting people to violence or panic.
Sounds reasonable to me.
Who knows? What rules we have may be disposed with altogether. Then posters can run amok 4Chan style and this place will quickly become as much fun and have as much utility. Much the same thing will happen as the blog continues to grow if you really expect one already busy man to deal with every administrative task required. However it works out though, it will work out.
Banning is a power JT has specifically reserved and all the GBs respect that reservation. No one has been banned in a very long time. However, until policies are in place to deal with persistent problem rule breakers, the terrain is being assembled piecemeal.
Your rather obvious personal vendetta notwithstanding.
Well here it is at the end of the day and I see a controversy about slcobras comment being deleted and others being accused for my action. Here is what occurred and those can judge me, or not for my actions. Part of what we guest bloggers do is moderste the spam and modrration filters since many comments get stuck there wrongly. slcobra made a rather long comment and in the course of which used one of the forbidden words so was autoaticcally put in moderation by WordPress. I saw the comment in moderation. Since there were no other banned words in it my first inclination was to edit the banned word and approve it. However, when I read the comment again it was quite crude and has a violent subtext. Since if I hadn’t intervened the remark would have remaied in mediation forever. We are under no obligation to edit your material too pass muster, Considering the nature of the comment and given that it would have remained in moderation I deleted it. Please fee free to comment.
Nal: “In the meantime, I’ve obtained some really nice additions to my stereo collection.”
*
Hehehe, the first rule of Fight Club….. 🙂
I wondered about that, I miss the tunes but it’s not worth having to worry about take-down notices.
best response to a cease and desist letter I’ve see in a long while, enjoy:
http://abovethelaw.com/2013/06/how-to-write-a-great-response-to-a-cease-and-desist-letter/