Snoopy

[Cynthia]

... I am troubled by what appears to be glee here over Lynette’s misfortune to get tangled up with that psychopath in the first place. And Steffan is clearly angry that she exercised her right to expungement. He can post all the links he wants to allegations about anyone but that is all they are – allegations. I could go file an affidavit tomorrow that says Steffan is a pedophile – but that doesn’t make it true! As for bringing up a forgotten story and creating more embarrassment, nothing could be further from the truth Synthian! Your phony concern for her is quite obvious, as it was you who wanted her outed in the first place if memory serves me.

What glee? what psychopath? what anger?

See? Here you go again.. no proof. You can't stop focusing on Lynette and posting about and making her the topic, and Stefan and my perceived offenses against her your major and continuing concern... when most? could care less...

But as you continue to bring her up?

NO, despite the thread she started and named blaming me, I did not out her to the public at all. She and her friends did that. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE THAT ACCUSATION HERE AGAIN? Then please go find the post where I did so, and quote or supply the link to it. Otherwise any post you make here repeating that claim without the asked for support and evidence will be removed.

When doing your search, please consider the following:

Lynette Rhodes, who is registered as Snoopy on AT, also registered as Ben Brantley on AT. That is the name of the son of a poster and another member of adventtalk. She did so to post in opposition to that member. When she was pm'd and told her behavior against this member resembled that of a stalker... Snoopy posted and announced the stalking incident to the world herself in a public post quoting that private pm:

Snoopy
Global Moderator
Veteran Member
Gender: Female
Posts: 1861

Undercover Games
« on: October 29, 2008, 11:08:55 PM »

And the games continue…

Just in case any of you are curious, I recently signed up here as “Ben Brantley” just to make a point.... I don’t know any “Ben Brantley”. I just picked that name after Jeanette Brantley did so much whining and complaining about me that I resigned as moderator. Yes, she complained about “Ben Brantley”, too!!
....But here is the very interesting part of the Ben Brantley story. In June of 2007, there was a “gathering” of several BSDA members out in California. I was invited, along with many others. That trip resulted in some precious friendships that I value to this day, but from what I have learned since then I know it was a setup in many ways. It was on that trip that I met Cindi Kline Randall and Jeanette Brantley. They seemed sincere, and as you know I trusted them as friends.

At the time I was involved in the very painful ending of a broken engagement, and last fall my ex-fiance accused me of stalking him when I was trying to collect money on a legal judgment I had against him..... Now with that background in mind, check out this PM Ben Brantley just received....:

on October 28, 2008, 09:26:27 PM
The jig is up Ms Rhodes . . . we all know you are the one writing under this nom de plume . . . seems to be the same tactics a stalker would use.

I think Ben Brantley's presence here is finished (although I cannot speak for "Benjamin"), but has proved very insightful!! Thank you, anyman, for confirming that neither Jeanette Brantley or Cindi Kline Randall are to be trusted!!

My note: neither of those women told either myself or Anyman this story nor betrayed any confidences.

But the intended reaction was elicited here and even better than expected! Steffan announced to the world, or at least to your readers, that in the eye of the law the incident never happened. And how fitting that it would be this group to disclose the expungement, as it was you who were so anxious that the incident be made public in the first place. Thank you for publishing the end of the story and putting it to rest!

Well, you might be happy in thinking you got the elicited reaction to your posts... But I'm thinking "isn't this all so paranoid, and silly, and even damaging to "Snoopy"?" No one on adventtalk or here even brought up or announced "the incident", except Lynette.

The fact that it was expunged only means it existed beforehand as Lynette "Snoopy" posted herself, and posters here only afterwords replied to, and proved. I keep thinking you all must think others are idiots, when they are NOT. You yourself have only confirmed it all.

Think, please...

How did we disclose the expungement of her record? It was you, a poster claiming to be her friend, who brought it up and made the fact that it was expunged known with your timely game playing and posts here. I agree, the record was expunged. In fact, no one here that I can see has argued that it was not. Why would we? As I said, it only confirms she had a record to expunge....

..ian

(The above was written months ago, but was saved in my forum draft folder rather than being posted)

[Cynthia]

Copy of Post made on AT. Saved here due to the recent subtle and not so subtle legal threats made by Lynette Rhodes, just in case of any funny business as things have a way of disappearing without explanation on that forum....


Ian
Senior Member
Gender: Female
Posts: 357
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good"

Re: Ian and Rosa out accounting volunteer
« Reply #400 on: March 22, 2009, 06:11:31 AM »

on March 21, 2009, 11:01:13 AM

Cindy Conard Ford seems to have forgotten about this thread, so I thought I'd help her out and bring it forward for her review.

Thank you, but I never understood why you felt you needed to name this thread "Ian and Rosa out accounting volunteer" and move all here (and still don't) but I know better than to try to explain my feelings, thoughts or posts, to you at least, as that was attempted many times....

Readers, In reviewing the thread, here are the only posts Snoopy moved here from me or from rosa (which I can find) before imo Snoopy outed herself and everyone else she perceived as wronging her. But judge for yourself please.

( That's all I have to say about that, Snoopy. It seems we'll just have to agree to disagree.)

reply # 1 in thread:

on October 11, 2008, 09:53:45 PM
Snoopy I am just curious, do you know Mike Wilson?

..ian

reply # 30 in thread:

on October 14, 2008, 01:04:12 PM

on October 11, 2008, 10:11:36 PM

on October 11, 2008, 09:53:45 PM
Snoopy I am just curious, do you know Mike Wilson?

..ian

I am curious, Ian, do you know Mike Wilson?

About as well as I do Larry Ewing, and others who have worked in 3abn's accounting department in the past...

How? What do you know about him? Do you know where he is and what he is doing? Do you know who he is married to and who his X is married to? How about their restaurant? Do you know who took over after they divorced? Did Mike's X go to work for Remnant? Is she still there? Where is she? Have you eaten at their restaurant?

That really isn't all that important, is it?

I guess Snoopy didn't want to answer either.

laters...


==============
Edited by Artiste to remove inappropriate content

Note:
before Artiste edited out "inapropriate content" the sentence above read:

"About as well as I do Larry Ewing, Lynette, and others who have worked in 3abn's accounting department in the past..."



reply # 35 in topic:

on October 14, 2008, 10:16:27 PM

on October 14, 2008, 06:32:56 PM
So Ian, why did you bring Mike Wilson's name up? What was your purpose?

Wow. Things come and go so quickly around here.

I am sorry, apparently I am not allowed to post my purpose ...

(Note: At this point I was banned.. the referred to answer... was the only post of mine which was deleted from this discussion. I was banned in reference to artiste's edited post above for allegedly "outing a poster". yeah... bingo!)

reply # 39

on October 15, 2008, 08:01:28 AM

on October 15, 2008, 01:04:00 AM
Ian, don't you think enough innocent blood has been shed? Why do you gleefuly you lead another lamb to the slaughter? Leave Mike out of this for God's sake! Larry too! How many people do you want to see shredded on the forums? How much innocent blood has to be spilled to make you happy? I don't think there is enough blood in the world to be sacrificed on the alter of your holy sacrament to satisfy you and the devotees like you. Yes, I am sure you are allowed to post your purpose, but that would be redundant. We have all read about such things in the study of religions that practice human sacrifice. History is bloated with religous organizations and their prepostrous sycophants who thrive on the shedding of innocent blood. You are nothing new.

Do you know Mike? I doubt it. Do you know Theresa? I doubt it. Do you know Snoopy? I doubt it. Do you know Larry? I doubt it. IMO, you are someone who knows no one and nothing in this situation and doesn't care for anyone but yourself and the tin gods you follow, yet presume to make yourself a something by crying out that you know everything and try to make yourself a visible leader in a tiny war in which you have absolutely no stake. You speak vehemently against Gailon and Bob accusing them of doing exactly what you do.

In my opinion, you naming all but one here is an obvious attempt at an evasive maneuver, and attempt to cover over, and distract, as was your earlier reply here. Ian seemed to me to have already clarified that Mike, his wife, Larry, etc etc etc wasn't the issue, or of any importance. [Of course it's hard to determine that now after all the housecleaning.. But with the interesting number of members, and guests registered and on this thread while this took place, there is no doubt they surely witnessed this as I did..]

What occurs to me to be an issue is one of ethics and legality in someone certified and licensed using that to volunteer, to possibly infiltrate, spy on and act as a mole.

I also wonder about the fairness in allowing and condoning a whole thread to discuss a certain "Cindi" and accusations concerning ethics and legalities and such, while censoring and not allowing this topic.

To be very blunt - IT STINKS to high heaven.

But what do I know? At least this.. that observation will brand me as a bloodsucker here also.

And... this reply will probably be very short lived also. I may just have to register at 3atalk, to quote all that has been removed here and continue the discussion... I guess the choices made here will determine that?

Go with God.

-- Rosa

reply # 41

on October 15, 2008, 01:33:20 PM
Yes, “Ian” is talking about me. I can’t believe it took her this long to figure things out since she prides herself on her sleuthing abilities. I am sure her new found knowledge has something to do with two people who tried to convince me that they were my friends – Jeanette Brantly (known here as “GrandmaNettie” and at BSDA as “PeacefulBe”, formerly “PeacefullyBewildered”) and Cindi Kline Randall (known here as “ImaAnt” and probably “Rosa” and at BSDA as “Noahswife”). I’m telling you right now, with “friends” like them…well, you know the rest.

And let me thank Cindy Conard, otherwise known as “Ian” (and a variety of names at BSDA including “Aletheia”) for taking it upon herself to introduce me to you. There is SO much I have wanted to share with you all. But now thanks to (Synth)“Ian”, I can tell you the whole sad saga of my very unfortunate involvement with 3ABN.

I was raised SDA but fell away from the church. I have always believed in God but was turned off by a lot of the SDA stuff. When I was spared in a near-fatal car accident in 2005, I realized that God really does protect me and I felt like I wanted to do something for Him. I had just become familiar with 3ABN and so I decided to offer my time as a volunteer there. I am a Certified Public Accountant, a Certified Fraud Examiner, and am very close to finishing a Master of Science degree in Economic Crime Management. I contacted Larry Ewing to see if he could use me in the Accounting Department. He agreed, and I was thrilled. I was being drawn back toward the church. But here is an important distinction – I was never employed by 3ABN. I volunteered thousands of hours of my time and I even made a substantial donation to 3ABN. Now I wish I had never even heard of the place. So much for trying to do something good.

I spent every other week at 3ABN headquarters from January thru spring campmeeting of 2006. During that time I saw and heard things that would turn the stomach of any donor. I have a good deal of experience in public accounting, internal audit, internal business controls and financial analysis. I tried over and over again to inspire some changes in the accounting processes at 3ABN but I was told many times by Larry Ewing that he was not a fan of internal controls and that he certainly did not want to get “tripped up by them”. He also once shared with me that he had just finished “cleaning out the storeroom” and “getting rid of old documents”. I would later learn about the ongoing dispute with Linda Shelton, as well as the IRS criminal investigation. Any organization whether non-profit or for-profit should know better than to destroy documents when they are involved in any type of legal dispute. When I learned about the IRS criminal investigation I called Larry Ewing. While he couldn’t discuss it, he did confirm it. That was all I needed to hear, and I decided to formally sever my professional relationship with 3ABN in accordance with the principles set forth by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). I also contacted the AICPA Department of Professional Ethics for guidance as to my professional responsibility as I was not an employee nor was I at 3ABN in a public accountant role.

I drafted a letter to 3ABN where I listed all of my accounting and internal control concerns. Still under the impression that Cindi Kline Randall was my friend, I took her up on her offer to proofread the draft of my letter to 3ABN with an eye for ethics and legality, as she had represented herself to me to be an attorney. Thus, she had access to all of my specific concerns in that letter. Little did I know then that she would take my trust in her and use it against me. It was just in the last few months that I learned that both Cindi Kline Randall and Jeanette Brantly were in regular contact with Cindy Conard!! As you can see from “Rosa’s” post here, I am now being accused of being a spy and a mole!! So either Cindi Kline Randall has been talking to “Rosa” or she is now posting as “Rosa” in an effort to discredit me and cast aspersions on my ethics! I was at 3ABN before Bob and Gailon ever got involved!! When I learned of the allegations against 3ABN I was stunned! I have more to say on the topic of Cindi Kline Randall and ethics, but I’ll save that for another post since according to “Rosa” the topic is fair game!!

Here I thought I was doing something good for the Lord and I walked into a hornet’s nest. I am no longer interested in getting involved in church work. For all their talk about “mending broken people” I think the reverse applies to me – “breaking mended people”. There is no doubt in my mind that “Ian” and “Rosa” and company will now look for any and every opportunity to try to discredit me and make me look bad. As I am only human, I'm sure they will find something!! They will probably even try to have me disfellowshipped from the church, but since I don’t even know if I am a member, who cares!!! However, I can guarantee you that I will think twice about ever volunteering for or donating to a religious organization ever again.

So, there’s my story in a nutshell. A big thank you to “Ian” for opening the door and to "Rosa" for holding it open! I stand firmly behind the work being done by Bob and Gailon. There is no doubt in my mind that they will prevail. I have seen many accusations against both of them for being dishonest and misleading. But since I shared my story with them privately, I have not once seen one shred of evidence of that. I also am a firm believer in the great work done by Fran. She is a true servant of God and an awesome accountant! For the Lord’s sake, I do hope that 3ABN can survive the mess they have created for themselves. The problem lies not with the organization itself but with management and the board of directors.

Knowing what I know now, I would not give a “shiny penny” to the organization until there are some major changes made. And I would encourage each of you to share that caution with your family, friends and church members.

While I obviously misplaced my trust in some here, there are others among you here who have proven your friendship over and over. For that I am grateful, and you each have a special place in my heart. More details will be forthcoming, thanks to “Ian” and “Rosa”!!

Lynette *******, CPA, CFE

on October 15, 2008, 02:49:44 PM

shaking my head again...

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: my answer
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 15:39:59 -0500
From: Cindy
...

..Ian wrote:

> I am banned there right now to the extent I am blocked from reading the forum eve, Snoopy is answering and claiming she answered before?? hmmm. obviously not true, and Lynette couldn't be more wrong, and thus there is no way she can prove what she thinks and says. Whether about those she claims were her friends or about what she says was at fault with 3abn. Both of those she considered her friends were always and still are far better friends to her, and respecting of her privacy and endlessly concerned about her and her well being than she has ever been of them or theirs, as her posts reveal. She outed them and myself? well see?? that is that 2 wrongs make a right and end justifies the means thinking at work. ( no doubt 'AT" admin will allow it) If they had not been true friends to her, I would have already outed her over a year ago as the mole or spy or thorn at 3abn, for I asked more than once who snoopy was and they apologized and always refused to say or even give a clue. I respected that, as I knew they would do the same with myself where others were concerned.
>
> Sad to say, despite Snoopy's futile and unproven attempts to cast blame on others. it is her own posts, and chats on BSDA, in conjunction with Bob's filing of a letter from her in court and the posts on adventtalk by her and others which clicked together and revealed her identity to me. I am not surprised she won't see that. The phrase "paranoia will destroy ya comes to mind"
>
> Yes I have been in contact with both Jeanette and Cindi as she posts, and I love them both! dearly!! They are true friends and sisters despite some of our differences in opinions, perspectives and POV in some of these issues --with both myself and Lynette as well. And they aren't the only ones I have been in contact with or vice versa in these issues and forum discussions. True friends are a blessing from God. I have met more than my hands can number of new friends and brethren during these past couple of years, and have a respectful, loving and honest relationship with them and have only received the same in return. Some may think me a liar, I don't care, others might be surprized to discover who some of my friends are are.. Cheesy (not really their business tho...) I have no desire to name, or embarrass any, or bring criticism on any others, because of their relationship to me, but they know who they are and that I thank God for each and every one of them! Smiley True Christians are able to rise above all this and form bonds and interests, trusting in the Lord to settle any differences and reveaal all truth to all in the long run, and bring all into unity with him and thus each other --- if, that is their desire, as it is His.
>
> ..ian

[/quote]

[Cynthia]

link=topic=1389.msg16405#msg16405 date=1226514644
Oh skiguy, don't pay "no nevermind" to the comments at 3atalk! I go look over there when I need some entertainment!! It's a small group of dannyclones who grow increasingly angry with each new incriminating revelation about the Shelton/3ABN history....

Is that true? Well, according to her latest claims she also comes here to read and print out hard copies of posts...

If that is true then the following subtle and not so subtle legal threats and attempts at intimidation from her on AT are copied here for her convenience, as well as to preserve them, in case at some future date someone there decides to remove them.

... But it is nice that Breezy Sam is willing to promote my work for me!

Maybe I should rethink my strategy and hire her to advertise for me instead of suing her for defamation!!

(Note: her many references to Breezy Sam are absurd as she has been corrected before as those are 2 different people entirely. Only she and her sock puppet Michael Kopper (a member here and on AT) appear to think otherwise. MK's post/threats were removed from this thread for being too over the top, but can still be read here to see why: Does not play well with others after this she appears to have registered a couple of more times, as both Liz Cyriac and Hyacinth Andrews... )

Here is the latest from her about legal issues and suing:

link=topic=1067.msg18928#msg18928 date=1236786486

Ha! Do you prefer "Mrs. Ford"? By the way, Cindy, do you have an attorney? Just curious...

link=topic=1067.msg19147#msg19147 date=1237571710

Pretty proud of yourself, aren't you Cindy Conard Ford?? The more people you and your little friends can out, the better you all feel about yourselves, huh? Well, get your kicks now, cuz I think your day is coming - yours and Steffen's in particular. By the way, how is your attorney friend Cindy Randall?... Will she be the one to handle your legal issues?

link=topic=1067.msg19167#msg19167 date=1237654484

You mean like how 3ABN and Danny Shelton threatened Gailon and Bob with legal action for so long? Is THAT the type of threat you are talking about as being ridiculous and unchristian Cindy? ...

Now, as to your perspective on my "threat". You and your little friends Steffan, Sammy and several others are guilty of defamation per se, and I have already consulted with an internet defamation attorney who looked at your smut site as well as several posts here at AdventTalk and he thinks I have a good case!! He's just waiting for me to sign his contract, and I am trying to decide whether its worth it to have to deal with you in litigation for a period of time. I try to ignore your posts, but when I do happen to see one it usually just pushes me closer to signing that contract. So, stew on that for a while! And don't worry about trying to go back and edit stuff out, as I have been printing out hard copies of your garbage for some time now.
...

link=topic=1624.msg19171#msg19171 date=1237665013
Ha! That's pretty funny! Cindy, do you have a replacement in mind? Maybe you'd like to apply...?? BTW, what ARE you an expert in?? Other than accusations and defamation?? Oops...guess you'll have to allow me to be very blunt as well...

link=topic=1624.msg19205#msg19205 date=1237778182
Maybe you should spend a little more time worrying about your own numerous issues instead of trying to advise Bob how to handle his own litigation, which, by the way, has nothing to do with you!!

Toodles back at ya...

[Cilghal]

It is difficult to understand and accept why some choose to believe things that are not true or look to find reasons not to trust friendship because of differences of opinion. Looking for proof of betrayal does not mean it happened or that people who claim not to lie do not repeat lies. Sadly sometimes friendships are lost and can never be recovered.

This video at youtube though is a gift to Snoopy today from those who cared and still care about her.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypncefLb ... re=related

[Cynthia]

It is difficult to understand and accept why some choose to believe things that are not true or look to find reasons not to trust friendship because of differences of opinion. Looking for proof of betrayal does not mean it happened or that people who claim not to lie do not repeat lies. Sadly sometimes friendships are lost and can never be recovered.

This video at youtube though is a gift to Snoopy today from those who cared and still care about her.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypncefLb ... re=related

Perfect.

Thank you for posting this.

..ian

[Penny]

Mr Pickle along with his financial advisors looked at the partial documents they had and came to the erroneous conclusion that this was an excess benefit, paid retirement, and a purchase of a property for below the market price.

folks have been trying for years now to correct you when you are wrong, but you pay no attention...sigh...

In this case, Snoopy is the one that is wrong and has wrongly interpreted the documents - as have Pickle, Joy, Fran. She continues to pay no attention, but rather, like the rest of that clan, is so invested and committed to their incorrect interpretations that she seems quite unable to recognize that she is very wrong.

Then...

The fellow I mentioned speaking to was an trust services expert who was giving a seminar....

I also spoke with an attorney about the transaction. In both cases, I believe I mentioned the life estate part of the transaction. (emphasis added)

This is the problem...Pickle only "believes" that he "mentioned" the life estate part of the transaction to these experts. The life estate is not an unimportant incidental side-issue that has no effect on the transaction. Rather the life estate is the critical key to the transaction and the key to why the transaction was perfectly legal, ethical and appropriate. As long as Pickle continues to disregard, ignore or diminish the importance of this point his interpretations and opinions are profoundly wrong.

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index. ... 34.15.html (see replies #16 and #19 for quotations above)

[Penny]

Mr Pickle along with his financial advisors looked at the partial documents they had and came to the erroneous conclusion that this was an excess benefit, paid retirement, and a purchase of a property for below the market price.

folks have been trying for years now to correct you when you are wrong, but you pay no attention...sigh...

In this case, Snoopy is the one that is wrong and has wrongly interpreted the documents - as have Pickle, Joy, Fran. She continues to pay no attention, but rather, like the rest of that clan, is so invested and committed to their incorrect interpretations that she seems quite unable to recognize that she is very wrong.

Then...

The fellow I mentioned speaking to was an trust services expert who was giving a seminar....

I also spoke with an attorney about the transaction. In both cases, I believe I mentioned the life estate part of the transaction. (emphasis added)

This is the problem...Pickle only "believes" that he "mentioned" the life estate part of the transaction to these experts. The life estate is not an unimportant incidental side-issue that has no effect on the transaction. Rather the life estate is the critical key to the transaction and the key to why the transaction was perfectly legal, ethical and appropriate. As long as Pickle continues to disregard, ignore or diminish the importance of this point his interpretations and opinions are profoundly wrong.

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index. ... 34.15.html (see replies #16 and #19 for quotations above)

I expound further...3ABN did not sell the house to Linda and Danny. They sold 3ABN's remainder interest in the home. There is a vast difference. The fair market value of the remainder interest in the home was $6,139 at the time that Linda and Danny purchased it. And that is all that 3ABN could sell - 3ABN's remainder interest in the home, since Linda and Danny already owned a life interest in the property. And what Linda and Danny paid was the fair market value of the remainder interest (which they did not already own) ... accordingly there was no excess benefit granted to either Linda or Danny.

Can I make this any clearer?

It seems that Bob does not, cannot, refuses to or is unable to understand this. Bob need to do his homework off line, spend some time learning to understand the complete transaction and what a remainder interest is, instead of continuing to expose his ignorance for all the world to see.

[The Red Baron]

Queen Snoopy's latest Red Letter pronouncement:

ADMIN HAT ON

You know Cindy, one of your less intelligent moves was to come along after the fact and edit out an admin red hat warning! Your audacity is somewhwat amusing. As I said earlier, you can not and will not dictate the direction of a discussion on this forum!! This thread is about questions for Danny, and his divorce and ex-wife are entirely relevant. You will NOT throw the "off topic" card around just because you don't like someone's anwer to your demands. So, you say your done here?? Yes, you are! At least for a couple of days!! Capiche?? Toodles!!

ADMIN HAT OFF

What a piece of work! I haven't quite figured out why she is so deathly afraid of Ian.

[Cynthia]

Well I am literally banned at the drop of a hat and usually just deal with it because even though I may disagree with the statements she makes or the conclusions she draws, I at least understand what she bases those things on, and feel that there is no sense in attempting to change her mind about it.

What makes this time even more remarkable though is that I don't understand what she is even talking about here or where this even came from or what it is even based on.

So, I have sent emails to Snoopy and Johann both and a kind soul has sent that email via a pm to Emma for me as I am blocked from AT and cannot do that myself,(see below) so we will see what, if any, response is forthcoming from those administrators...

..ian

I received the following by email:


Advent Talk wrote: A reply has been posted to a topic you are watching by Snoopy.

View the reply at: http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index. ... icseen#new

ADMIN HAT ON

You know Cindy, one of your less intelligent moves was to come along after the fact and edit out an admin red hat warning! Your audacity is somewhwat amusing. As I said earlier, you can not and will not dictate the direction of a discussion on this forum!! This thread is about questions for Danny, and his divorce and ex-wife are entirely relevant. You will NOT throw the "off topic" card around just because you don't like someone's anwer to your demands. So, you say your done here?? Yes, you are! At least for a couple of days!! Capiche?? Toodles!!

ADMIN HAT OFF

Regards,
The Advent Talk Team






and when I go to the forum it says:

"Sorry Guest, you are banned from using this forum!
Violation of Forum Rule #9"
==============


What is this based on??

I did not edit out any red hat warning.

I did not even see any red hat warning.

I am subscribed to the topic, and there is no red hat warning in any emails.

I have asked others who were reading the forum last night if they saw a red hat warning and none of them saw one either.


Thanks in advance for your time and your help here,

Cindy (ian)

[Penny]

Well I am literally banned at the drop of a hat and usually just deal with it because even though I may disagree with the statements she makes or the conclusions she draws, I at least understand what she bases those things on, and feel that there is no sense in attempting to change her mind about it.

What makes this time even more remarkable though is that I don't understand what she is even talking about here or where this even came from or what it is even based on.

So, I have sent emails to Snoopy and Johann both and a kind soul has sent that email via a pm to Emma for me as I am blocked from AT and cannot do that myself,(see below) so we will see what, if any, response is forthcoming from those administrators...

..ian

I received the following by email:


Advent Talk wrote: A reply has been posted to a topic you are watching by Snoopy.

View the reply at: http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index. ... icseen#new

ADMIN HAT ON

You know Cindy, one of your less intelligent moves was to come along after the fact and edit out an admin red hat warning! Your audacity is somewhwat amusing. As I said earlier, you can not and will not dictate the direction of a discussion on this forum!! This thread is about questions for Danny, and his divorce and ex-wife are entirely relevant. You will NOT throw the "off topic" card around just because you don't like someone's anwer to your demands. So, you say your done here?? Yes, you are! At least for a couple of days!! Capiche?? Toodles!!

ADMIN HAT OFF

Regards,
The Advent Talk Team






and when I go to the forum it says:

"Sorry Guest, you are banned from using this forum!
Violation of Forum Rule #9"
==============


What is this based on??

I did not edit out any red hat warning.

I did not even see any red hat warning.

I am subscribed to the topic, and there is no red hat warning in any emails.

I have asked others who were reading the forum last night if they saw a red hat warning and none of them saw one either.


Thanks in advance for your time and your help here,

Cindy (ian)

She has now posted this apology:

Cindy,

I owe you an apology with regard to the alleged editing of my red hat warning last night. A bit of research shows that you and I were editing your post at the same time. However, I posted my edit only a minute or so ahead of you so when you posted your edit it overrode my edit which apparently you never saw.

Snoopy

Good of her to acknowledge her error. Better to first check the situation before blowing off.