I just noticed that abyss mentioned my entries about her in her latest serving of nutjob a flambe. I notice that she failed to address anything of substance from my comment and never released it from moderation, but that was to be expected. I ecpsecially like how she brought out the list of insanity at the bottom. The fact that it misses every major point of evidence in this case and nothing refers specificly to any of the three players charged is pretty telling. If that's not a mental deficiency, I'm not sure what is.

It's also the second time she stresses that somehow those who believe the players are innocent and no attack occurred have somehow constantly shifted their theories. In my comment, I asked her to please feel free to back up any of those suppositions. After all, there are a crapload of sites that have been following this case and believe that the accuser was and still is lying. These sites include TalkLeft, Durham in Wonderland, Liestoppers, and many others. Of course she was unable to backup her batshit insane assertions with actual evidence and instead simply makes the baseless accusation once more.

I'm sure no doubt that you can trace this delusional thinking to her claim that she was once raped. I have no clue whether she was or not nor what the story is behind the accusation. What I'm starting to wonder about is if maybe the rapist skullfucked her because I'm pretty sure there's been some pretty extensive cerebral damage. If he did, then I think he should get the death penalty because he's ended up inflicting her now demented insanity on the rest of us.

Abyss2Hope continues to spew 'crazy' all over the place in her recent post. It simply amazes me that someone could actually believe what she's blithely typing away and not be fundamentally derranged in some manner. It's a key symptom of a variety of psychological disorders to constantly revise history to support your crazy assumptions. Why were there no bugging devices found in your cavity fillings despite your certainty the CIA placed them there? Oh, well their allies the aliens from planet X must've come in the night and swapped them out so they wouldn't be detected. She's a nutjob.

In the end I couldn't help myself and just had to respond. Since she only posts the emails of the crazy ranters, so she dosen't have to answer any real substantive questions about being batshit insane, I'm almost certain it won't make it through comment moderation. It basically challenges her crazyass revisionist history about the case. I know that I personally didn't become interested in the whole fiasco until the DNA evidence was due to come back and signs were pointing to problems with the timeline. Before that point, I pretty much accepted that an attack had most likely occurred because I believed that no woman would go around making shit up like that and took her at her word. Needless to say, I don't think I'll be making that mistake again in the future. If there's one thing this case has taught me, it's that I can't expect other people to be rational actors. The world is full of the batshit insane from lying whore Chrystal to revisionist dingbat Marcella. These people don't operate like normal people and it's often a tragic mistake when you assume they're going to be rational thinkers.

What really bothers me about this whole deal is the sheer number of people out there who continue to insist that the players are not innocent and that it's still possible 'something happened' that simply can't be proven. That might as well be some sort of litmus test for insanity. Anyone who expresses an opinion like that should be flagged and tagged for a full psychological workup because you can be pretty sure they've slipped a cog somewhere. Pressed on this issue they usually respond that the world of a black woman sexworker was never going to be accepted no matter what. That no matter what she says, no one would ever believe her because the accused were three well-off white men at an elite university. What unmitigated revisionist bullshit. I'm not sure what's more infuriating, the fact that they seem to have convienantly wiped from their memories the outpouring of support for the lying whore and the fact that so many people in the media and elsewhere swallowed the story without question or the fact that to believe everything the accuser has said you would have to be schizoprenic. There isn't one iota of her story that hasn't changed. I still like the levitating, simultaneous, three-orifice gang-rape best though.

Oh well. Some people will always refuse to see what's right in front of them. All we can do is acknowledge that and be prepared to keep that in mind the next time they start flogging a case and telling us that it's a sure thing.

So it's been a day chock full of Duke Lacrosse case. I waited with anticipation for the AG's press conference, watched it with rapt attention and then the players' afterwards. Interspersed between those events and afterwards, I've been reading and posting on various blogs and combing through news stories looking for different reactions to the outcome. While most news outlets stuck to simply reporting the results, the reaction on blogs were obviously a bit more colored. There was a lot of celebration on various sites where people had poked holes in this travesty over the long months and even sites that had previously supported the lying whore seemed to have either muted their response or ignored the outcome altogether. After all, what is there left to say? It's unprecedented for a prosecuter reviewing a case to come out and declare that a group of defendents were not only not guilty, but actually innocent. He could have used one of any number of dodges, including simply stating that not only was there not enough evidence to continue with the case but that there was no evidence at all. Amazing.

Still, even among all the good cheer and sanity there have to be some basketcases. Some of you might recall a blogger I ran into in the early days of the hoax who was fanatically crazed in her belief in the accuser. Even the presentation of indisputable facts were verbotten if they at all hinted that the accuser was a lying basketcase. I popped back to her blog at Abyss2Hope to see how she was taking the news and to no surprise the answer is batshit insane. It makes me wonder if she and the two nutjobs who commented on the entry are learning disabled or might have simply suffered brain damage. Certainly their ability to comprehend the english language must be flawed in some serious manner. Repeatedly they try to claim the AG dropped the case due to insufficient evidence when when his statement went far beyond that. There was no credible evidence that a crime had occurred and he himself claimed the players were innocent.

in this case, the inconsistencies were so significant and so contrary to the evidence that we have no credible evidence that an attack occurred in that house that night.

Based on the significant inconsistencies between the evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.

Of course, this in no way pierces the fantasy realm that these crazy wenches are living in.

You'd think I'd have learned by now but I'm always surprised and almost baffled when hypocrisy rears its head on blogs where people claim to want to discuss the issues of the day. While people often claim to want discussion, what they often seem to prefer is an echo chamber where they can simply revel in the fact that no one who responds will ever disagree with them and fail to heap adoration.

This runs against my grain to a degree I almost can't describe. While almost anyone will describe me as being quite opinionated in my views on a topic, I welcome and even love debating issues with those who disagree with me. Frankly, I find those conversations far more interesting than ones where we're all on the same page nad marching in lockstep. It seems that that sort of welcome for contradictory views is on the decline in our society, from the strong shift to political commentary from political news on tv/radio to the monocultures out there of strictly liberal or conservative blogs/sites. The goal seems to be to form these insular communities where everyone agrees with you and has the same worldview be it based on politicial affiliation, color, religion, or creed.

A while back I visited a site called Slant Truth, a blog I had found through links while commenting on the Duke Lacrosse case elsewhere. I made a few comments and in general left with a pretty positive feeling about the person running it and the blog in general. While we probaly would agree on next to nothing when it came to politics, world events, or race issues in general, he seemed like a nice and rational guy from the entries and claimed to welcome differing opinions as long as people didn't become nutjobs and degenerate into threat tossing. This was actually a step up since on other blogs and sites, comments had often been deleted simply because I might disagree with the owner. I thought that I had found another place that was lassie faire enough like Justice 4 Two Sisters for people with strong opinions on an issue to discuss it openly and without it degenerating into a flame-fest.

Here is his comment policy:

As long as you are not an asshole, you should feel free to comment here as much as you like. What do I mean by asshole? Well, if you disagree with me and want to say so, then by all means you should (and I can handle “bad words”, incivility, and all of that; you won’t get banned for swearing here); however, if it becomes clear that your goal is not to have a discussion, but to talk shit, try to disrupt the conversation, or make threats then I will ban your ass with the quickness. This space is my blog and I will do with it as I please.

Well, I didn't quite keep my promise to myself to check up on the blog and it was only a few days ago that I recalled to give it a look at all. A post had been made recently about the debacle on capitol hill with the fight over the raiding of congressman jefferson's office. I offered a comment that the support from both parties' congressional leaders likely wasn't what people were expecting when they laud bipartisan efforts. Half a day later, a new post came up about the duke lacrosse case was made concerning the 'innocent' arm bands the girls' team were set to wear and I also jotted off a comment. This one resulted in a response from a variety of posters so I kept posting.

Well, I'm pretty sure you can guess the ending from there so I won't bore you with it. I just find it baffling even though I shouldn't by now. Well, why don't you all judge for yourselves. Here is the thread. Take a look at my response and see what you think. Was my goal to not have a discussion? Did I try to talk shit? Did I disrupt the conversation? Did I make threats?

Okay, I think I'm in way over my head here. Since I've been looking at a lot of other blogs lately, I thought it would be nice if I tried to get a little more up to date on how blogging is supposed to work when you're not just pissing around on a LJ. I have only the vaguest idea of terms like RSS, XML, atom, pings, trackback, etc. I think I've generally figured out how RSS and the like works, and have downloaded the firefox extension Sage to keep track of it. Everything seems to be working pretty well so far, though I'm not sure how it's really all that much of an advantage than just checking the site. I guess if you have a crapload of blogs you're watching over and following, it must make it nice to know exactly which ones have been updated.

What's currently baffling the living fuck out of me are pings and more specifically trackback. I stumbled across the term on a few blogs and after looking around found a pretty basic summary on Wikipedia. It seems pretty straight forward, right? Wrong. Since I didn't want to pay hundreds of dollars for some high end blogging software, I searched around until I found some bare bones program that would accomplish the job that the creators put out. I took a look at the instructions and my head exploded almost immediately. I could wring more coherance out of this if it were in freaking german or backwards piglatin.

I think what it finally comes down to is you can't teach an old dog new tricks. Back in the day I could proably struggle and research and puzzle this sort of thing out but at this point, just looking at it gives me a headache. Whatever happened to the good old days where the most complex thing you had to master was figuring out all the freaking control codes for emacs?

Anyone out there who can give me a hand and translate?

To no surprise, a lot of people are out there blogging every day about the Duke lacrosse case, much like yours truly. People are digesting the latest news to hit the wires (of which there's something new at least every day) and then interpreting or spinning the results. Of course, most of these individuals already have a position on the case as to whether they believe a crime has occured. Lets face it, blogging is not really something for those restrained and reserved people who want to wait until all the facts are in before making up their minds in a deliberative and thoughtful manner. If you're going to be out there spewing your own conclusions on a contraversial topic that has touched nerves, you have to imagine that you're going to get a lot of heated responses, right?

Errr, apparently not. Lately it seems that there is a lot of whining and bellyaching out there from some people blogging about the case concerning the comments they're receiving. H E R E are just a few examples of it recently. You can add abyss2hope to that list though in her case it seems that anyone even disagreeing with her is too much for her to bear. Is it just me or does this seem a wee bit hypocritical? If you're using your blog to rant and/or express strong opinions, can you really whine that others are doing the same?

Maybe what the difference is, is a matter of degree. God knows that not a whole lot of people actually read this blog, and I'm sure that's true compared to at least some of the ones listed above. I've still had reaming hoards of anonymous commentors at times in the past posting insults and flames and I've never felt a need to delete comments. (Anyone remember that mess with the mohawk people site?) In fact, even if I don't comment to their comment, I unscreen the thing (anons are autoscreened) so that it can be viewed by everyone.

Now, maybe my view on this is based in part on the fact that I don't usually get dozens of vitriolic comments ever day from hoards of readers, but I'd like to believe that I'd feel the same way regardless. Hell, considering some of the vicious attacks and wars I would get into the middle of on other forums, this is practically childs play. So if anyone out there wants to say something particularly heinous, go right ahead. Maybe we should all grow some thicker skins.

First, my apologies for using the word 'props' but for some reason that's the first word that came to my mind. As a punishment to my brain for having come up with it, I'm going to keep the word there instead of replacing it. Let that be a lesson to you, brain. Feel the ridicule.

Second, I did want to give credit where credit is desserved, ecspecially after lampooning abyss2hope in the last entry. Not all people who have taken sides in this debate are complete and utter wankers when it comes to opinions and interpretations they disagree with. One site justice4twosisters, despite the name, has been very open and evenhanded about providing news links to the case and allowing commentary about it. This is despite the fact that some of us there are posting opinions contrary to what the blogger believes as to what happened at Duke.

That's a level of integrity that's not often found on the blogosphere in general, mostly because censorship is sooo easy. Delete a comment and it's as if it never existed at all. Someone posts some information that rebuts your point of view? Click delete and it's gone. Instead you've got an echo chamber where you're preaching to the converted and lapping up the praise. This tendancy is ecspecially great when the case is contraversial and when the blogger has staked out a position right from the beginning.

On March 14, 2006 two African-American women were hired to dance at a party by the Duke University Men's Lacrosse team. One of these African-American women was allegedly raped,sodomized, and racially terrorized by 3 white members of the Duke University Men's Lacrosse team. This site serves as a watchdog, information hub, and activism vehicle to ensure this young woman receives the justice she deserves. (It is our position both women were victims of a hate crime.)

I don't agree with that interpretation and even less now that more information seems to be coming out. That aside though, you have to give credit where credit is due even when (maybe ecspecially when) you disagree with someone's opinion. So a big thumbs up to you, song4assata.

Well, it seems that my little effort to put together a timeline has not met with rousing appreciation, at least from the rabid 'GUILTY! GUILTY!' crowd. After putting it together I went to a couple of blogs that have been following the case and posted it up to see what others thought. In one I stumbled across abyss2hope, the writer had floated some other timeline speculations that were just completely off. I mean, when your speculation runs afoul of what the accuser and 2nd stripper themselves stated to police, it's a fair bet you're not going to get very far arguing that a crime occurred. I posted a response that contained the timeline only to have it deleted almost immediately. I wasn't even offensive or arguementative or anything. Sorta makes me wish I had just brought out the flame thrower from the get go but it also made me curious why someone who was supposedly asking questions about the event's timeline would just go and delete a comment from someone willing to discuss it.

Well, looking around the page a little more it seems pretty clear. Here's her 'bio':

I'm a writer and novelist who has viewed the world from a slightly off-center perspective ever since date rape at 15 jolted me from being a rule-following innocent into my new being as a rule-breaking cynic with a razor-sharp tongue. Twenty years of silence about why I changed overnight was followed by 9 plus years as a volunteer victim's advocate. In my first novel, Cherry Love, I put readers in my shoes so they can gain a deep understanding of the attitudes that keep date rape alive and unwell.

Well that figures. At worst she's some sort of emotionally screwed up basket case with feminazi tendancies viewing the world as one giant proxy battle from her past. At best, she's obviously got a stake in believing every single rape accuser out there, even when the facts might not fit. I've often thought to myself that nutjobs like this should be forced to wear a sign or other identifying mark in real life so that you know what you're going to get into before they spaz out on you. Here's a case where the 'sign' was there right on the blog and I overlooked it. My mistake. I don't know about her claims to have a 'razor sharp tongue' since all I've seen so far is a thin skin and a inclination to hide her head in the sand.

Looks like I'm still having my comments deleted. It always amazes me the lengths that some people will go to to avoid information contrary to what they believe. Frankly, I prefer to argue, debate, scream and curse about issues but for others it might just be upseting to be challenged on what they believe. Certainly I've yet to see any of the supposed rebel with the razor-sharp tongue in this case.