Didn’t ask you either. But gang up. Typical mean girl stuff. Not so cute.
2 Likes
Nice fantasy. While under active attack??? Bet your life the MB defense isn’t going there. You just make crap up.
2 Likes
Nice fantasy. While under active attack??? Bet your life the MB defense isn’t going there. You just make crap up.
well, you know.
MB does not have to prove his innocence. All his lawyers have to do is to convince the jury that the prosecution’s case is bogus, present alternative scenarios.
In any case, we are throwing the known facts into a blender and imagine what could have transpired. Seeing the primary actors don’t give a reliable account, for various reasons.
19 Likes
You assume I was speaking on the LK/MB case.
You assumed wrong. I was giving my opinion on self defence with a weapon.
Is that obsession I smell? I’m freshly bathed in a clean house so it’s not from here.
Hmmmm…
Perhaps some reading comprehension lessons are needed for you.
7 Likes
???
It was an open post, so it seems it applies to everyone.
How would I know it did not apply to me?
13 Likes
a. You failed to address your snark to any specific poster:
b. you posted on an internet bb, so anyone is free to comment/reply to it.
29 Likes
Yes, always. Here I am answering this post as it is not directed at anyone in particular…
I do proof read and try to catch all my typos and grammar issues… often fail… and have to edit AGAIN.
Or AGAIN. Or I may add a link that supports that post. I never edit to change the intent of my post - but simply to make that intent more clear.
And once again, we hear the tiresome and repetitive “mean girls” and “gang up” and “cute” - dismissive sh-stuff that shows no desire to actually have a conversation or discussion. Which prompts this question - do you even read the things you post?
19 Likes
And what is your position? 
3 Likes
The guardian of those who cannot defend themselves will not slumber nor sleep.
2 Likes
Uh oh
You did it now
4 Likes
We wanted to clear up some debate/confusion that the Inigo-montoya account was an alter account for Lauren Kanarek. The account does not share an IP address with the account she has posted under, and it is not registered to a Lauren Kanarek. The email account associated with the account can be linked to a person who is not LK as well. So that line of discussion can be dropped.
Again, the debate of this high-profile event and the court cases stemming from it are fine. We do grant a little more latitude for commentary regarding limited purpose public figures, but please avoid the cursing and name calling directed at other users if you’d like to continue to discuss the matter here. Also, please avoid posting personal information such as addresses, phone numbers, etc. of those being discussed.
21 Likes
Haha……I’m just teasing.
My position is that of a person with friends on both sides who was confided in by both sides ( by multiple sides, actually).
LK is not the monster people here make her out to be and MB is not an evil person.
1 Like
Yeah, I was addressing the approach of the mod.
2 Likes
Thank you for the clarification of the identity of IM. At times it appeared their posts sounded as though they were witnesses of the situation. We now know they have as little or as much actual knowledge as the rest of us and we can move on. Thank you for keeping us on track.
14 Likes
As far as LK being a monster or MB being evil, that would have to be the decision of those who have interacted with either of them, or who have read about their achievements and believe what they read. It’s all a matter of opinion.
4 Likes
As you are aware, addresses as well as a description of LK’s current residence have been posted here by individuals you can identify… Those individuals did so maliciously and they were well aware of COTH rules.
While admonishing people not to post personal information is appreciated, you, your editor and owner must understand that bell, once rung, cannot be unrung…
3 Likes
Oh it makes sense now.
2 Likes
I am confused what your point is, other than to threaten COTH?
This topic (and the NP topic) seems to bring out the need to threaten anyone who does anything not liked.
If an actual address was posted it was removed quickly enough that I never saw it (just a FYI). I know (personally saw) that LK posted photos of her new house on social media.
19 Likes
Actually, the actual physical address was not posted, only the street name and not the city. Any Google search by name and state will provide the same information. I fully understand the motive here is to have me banned…seems I get too close to the truth sometimes.
As far as ringing and unringing bells, isn’t that exactly what the attorneys are doing with their briefs?
ETA - I have never mentioned her FL address by the way!
8 Likes
[edit]
I was not threatening COTH and they know it.
I was saying people who knowingly violate COTH rules need to be punished……as in suspended or banned.
You didn’t notice LKs address posted? Too bad. COTH, to their credit, did notice it.
And what is your point that LK posted pictures of her home on social media? COTH doesn’t allow addresses, phone numbers, etc to be posted on their forum discussions.
Are you saying since LK posted pictures of her new home on Facebook that it is therefore ok to violate COTH rules?
1 Like
