Since the I did the post on the P-Blog Drama, I've gotten more anonymous comments than I have in the past year. The real irony is that the vast majority of anonymous comments have either been asking for personal information from P-Momma, or posting personal information themselves. So, I've just started deleting all anonymous comments.
Apparently, a bunch of people who suffer from cranial rectal inversion disorder just don't get it. When you ask for personal information, it's really fuckin' hypocritical to ask it as an "anonymous" commenter, or with a quickly made Gmail account so you can't be easily identified.
Now, I'm going to drop into the world of conjecture, since this is a rant. So, you wanna know what I think is the reason why I've gotten anonymous comments, or names that don't link to anyone? They're scared.
They keep asking me and P-Momma to prove her innocence, forgetting that it's their responsibility to prove her guilt when they are the ones who made the allegations. They've dug themselves so deep into a hole that the only way they can get out is to keep digging until they reach China. If they had proof P-Momma had done everything they say, all they would have had to do is link to it. However, every link they've sent to me has been so full of holes that they completely ignore it in their next comment or email, and move onto something else that they think proves their case.
Then, they claim that not being able to find the obituary for P-Momma's relative proves that he doesn't exist. That's a crock. For one, Google can't find everything. If I Google Princess's real name, I don't get any hits for her. Of course, that doesn't mean she doesn't exist. She went to high school, college, became an RN, and now works at a hospital. Google can be amazingly helpful, but it can't find everything. If it could, maybe the ones making this claim could Google themselves up a brain and an argument.
The most irritating part is the plethora of claims being made. If you debunk one, they move onto another without missing a beat. They keep claiming "one more" piece of evidence, until you start thinking that they just can't count past one.
They say, "I think Penn Mommy is P-Momma's sockpuppet." You say prove it, and they claim they can't. Perhaps there could be a reason why they can't prove it. Hmmm... Maybe, P-Momma is telling the truth!
If the sockpuppet charge doesn't work, they move onto "What about the Munchausen Booklist"? A look at the booklist shows two books on Munchausens. You point out that 2 books out of 32 doensn't support their claim, and you've also never heard of someone with a psychological disorder studying their own illness. Not to mention that she isn't a Mormon (3 books), isn't a descendant of the Donner family (1 book), isn't a wilderness doctor (1 book), and doesn't have any feral children (1 book).
So sockpuppet and the booklist are debunked, what else can they throw out? Next comes the personal information. Name, address, attempts at phone numbers (sorry, they haven't got it right, yet), LiveJournal profile, and her high school webpage. You point out that just proves that she exists (duh).
If you don't find any of that convincing, they bring up her geneology, and point out that Penn Mommy doesn't show up on it. Then, you point out that the tree only shows her father's side of the family, but Penn Mommy is on her mother's side (a cousin).
Then, they bring up that P-Momma said something on a private message board. You ask for evidence, and they give you cut/paste text. When you ask for them to let you see the message board, they say it's a private message board for members only.
After that, they go silent. I find it really fuckin' ironic that I asked for them to let me see the message board for myself, but they've never responded. They've thrown so much private information out there that it wouldn't surprise me to see a chart of P-Momma's DNA in a comment or my email (from an anonymous source, of course). Yet, they don't have the guts to let me see what P-Momma said in her own words.
When I first started looking into this, I had trouble figuring out what was going on. People were making so many claims that it almost seemed they were sometimes contradicting themselves. Then, I started asking questions. Instead of answering, they started sending me things that did absolutely nothing to prove their claims.
Now, I've come realize why they can't prove P-Momma's guilt. They don't know what the hell is going on either, but they need a scapegoat.
October 16, 2008
Hypocrisy and Anonymity
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
94 comments:
Excellent, Berlzebub! I'll keep coming to you for updates. I've been a reader of Pmomma's blog for quite a while... don't know whether I've actually commented there.It inevitably raised my spirits to read the words of so positive a human being. Can atheists have saints?
Watch out for geneAlogy, though!
(yeah, my real name) Bob Carroll
Wow, I had no idea it was against the law to read books that don't revolve the exact person you are. I guess I could be called a mormon then too, even though the books I read on the FDL were for a college research paper. Since I read my mother in law's christian fiction book she wrote and happily promote it for her, that must also make me a christian too? I have also read many romance and thriller books throughout the years, does that mean deep down I want to be a heroin/serial killer? It's called an interest in a topic. Just because something strikes someone as an interesting topic and would like to examine it further DOES NOT MAKE THEM THAT PERSON YOU FUCKTARDS!!!
Thank you, I feel better now. This whole thing with the 'book list' is one of the stupidest pieces of so called evidence, ever. What a piece of work Oprah must be then with all of her selections.
It took me a long time to find even my ex-husband's obituary on line, I even had the date and the newspaper it was put in. It took several searches.
And Aimee is my real name.
What I can't understand is what supposed harm these people are so indignant over in the first place. The only claim of anything "wasted" on PennMommy (that I've read) is prayer. I know we atheists have a very specific viewpoint on prayer and it's usefulness, but even setting that aside-if you prayed for someone you found out didn't exist, what's the big deal? Wouldn't whatever god you're praying to take your prayers and use them for someone worthy? If he/she/it wouldn't-do you think you should still be praying to that god? The bottom line here is that no one was hurt. Yes, you might have had your egos or your feelings bruised a bit (IF PennMommy's son really didn't exist...) but other than that-isn't it about time to let it go? Don't you have more interesting/useful things to do with your time? Go hug your family members, take a walk, pray for your loved ones (if that floats your boat) and stop taking your internet life so dang seriously.
Also-issue a full redaction and apology for attacking P-Momma, already. It's the responsible, adult thing to do. Isn't it time you all started acting like the responsible adults you are?
Pmomma is a very lucky person to have the strong advocates that she has! I hadn't known of her blog until the drama started, and I wish that I could have known about it before- she seems like a wonderful and wise person, based on the snippets I'm able to gather by poking around on here. Thank you for supporting her- those women are vicious! (although that is only my opinion!)
Lauren
Terra, what they "wasted" on Penn-mommy was emotion, was identifying with someone else's problems. They invested their empathy and sympathy into another person's plight. Prayer isn't a thing in itself in this case, it is a symptom of the empathy and sympathy that they extended to this person.
The big deal is in believing that your investment was betrayed. Sympathy betrayed seems to usually lead to anger, and it takes an effort in order to rise above that anger. This is basic "tit for tat" behavior and it is part of our evolutionary heritage and is part of what makes us human.
I can't blame anyone for reacting negatively when they find out that their sympathy is betrayed.
However, I can blame people for reacting without thinking, for reacting out of willfull eager stupidity, for refusing to think for themselves and for listening to a few people who manipulate emotions out of a petty sense of power.
The actions of these people have consequences. I don't expect the most vocal of these people to ever admit culpability. However, I could hope that the unthinking masses start to notice that their leaders have yet to post evidence.
What I can't understand is what supposed harm these people are so indignant over in the first place.
Not knowing them that well, I can only speculate. From the little I've read or gleaned from people who watched this unfold, Pennmommy exposed some inside information about the Gosselins that the GDNNOP crew would've preferred remained undisclosed. I've had people get in touch and say that she wasn't even as bad as some. Whatever that implies.
The bottom line here is that no one was hurt. Yes, you might have had your egos or your feelings bruised a bit (IF PennMommy's son really didn't exist...)
From what I can tell, this is accurate. Even with my personal feelings towards Pennmommy at this moment, I don't think she would run a financial scam. I know her other son William wouldn't! I think they're hurt because they invested emotion in Jason. What I can't figure out is why they turned so quickly on the notion that GDNNOP was truthful. I've read back and find post, after post, after post from the "hurt" people talking about how slimey GDNNOP are. They still accepted their consipracy theory hook line and sinker without investigating on their own.
Also-issue a full redaction and apology for attacking P-Momma, already
I won't be holding my breath for this occasion. What pennmommy did in building relationships just to abandon them and lie to them was wrong. I've been criticized for not disclosing what she lied about. I just don't think it's my place to get detailed. She lied about the nature of our relationship, William did too. She guilded the lily on her relationships with her kids and marriage to make herself sound admirable. From what I saw just on her blog she took liberties with her generosity. Most of all for me is that she impersonated me to build a following because I was "settled" on the net. I had an account she co-opted. I hadn't posted for about eight months on a private message board. She asked me about it which didn't sink in with me until the last two weeks. I posted on the private board about another show for a short time. William admitted that she changed the settings on that account to bypass my e-mail. I don't know what was said there. But, she did a good enough job to make them believe. I am sorry for her loss but done with the antics. That's not making me very popular in my family.
I have been following the P-momma drama from the Gosselin blogs.
I agree that no one proved that P-momma is a sockpuppet. As an observer who knows no one personally, I can tell you that nothing seems solid at this point.
There's no obituary, but so what? If Penn Mommy is real, at this point she'd be nuts to put an obit online. You can Google my real name in real life and get hits on someone completely different, none on me. And I found myself thinking, "Now that sounds interesting," when I read P-momma's book list, but I know I'm not a crazy sockpuppet!
However, I read Penn Mommy's blog and noticed something 'off' that hasn't been posted yet. I suspect that maybe she is a sockpuppet.
You can answer two questions for me, if you care to. If you did see proof that Possummomma was sockpuppeting Penn Mommy, would you think differently about her? Would that bother you, or change your relationship?
In addition, what proof could you see to convince you she's been sockpuppeting? I ask b/c I really can't imagine how someone could prove such a thing. They'd have to point to similar writing styles, similar life experiences, an admission that the same computer was used, and the unlikely existence of the sockpuppet, but that's not proof is it?
Thanks!
From what I can tell, this is accurate. Even with my personal feelings towards Pennmommy at this moment, I don't think she would run a financial scam. I know her other son William wouldn't! I think they're hurt because they invested emotion in Jason.
So these people are real?
I am confused.
I know PennMommy is a real relative, but did her son really die? Did the situation have any bit of truth to it? Does she even know the Gosselin Family?
PossumMomma, I am sorry if these people are accusing you of something you really didn't have a part of.
calladus,
In an above post on this thread you accurately describe the 'investment' many had in PennMommy's blog (emotion=betrayal=anger.) You're right, though to me, there is more to it. For some, if PennMommy's accounts were fraudulent, it makes their 'cause' suspect.
Also, you write, "However, I could hope that the unthinking masses start to notice that their leaders have yet to post evidence."
I am part of the smaller, but real, thinking masses and I have noticed that the evidence against Possummomma is not solid, beyond a reasonable doubt. But I have also noticed that there is no solid evidence coming from this side either. It is easier to prove someone you know does exist than to prove someone you can't know does not exist. As someone with no horse in the race, but very curious to see what is true, I wish someone would offer up proof. Perhaps the unthinking masses would be smaller if Possummomma's defenders offered a better defense?
@ Curious (first comment):
I'm curious what you mean by thinking "that sounds interesting". You aren't very clear on that.
What was "off" about Penn Mommy's blog? You need to be more clear, and links (Google Cache would work since Penn Mommy's blog is no longer there) would be a big help.
You can answer two questions for me, if you care to. If you did see proof that Possummomma was sockpuppeting Penn Mommy, would you think differently about her? Would that bother you, or change your relationship?
If I did see proof, more than the flimsy and circumstantial that has been provided so far, then yes it would bother me and change our relationship. How could it not?
In addition, what proof could you see to convince you she's been sockpuppeting? I ask b/c I really can't imagine how someone could prove such a thing. They'd have to point to similar writing styles, similar life experiences, an admission that the same computer was used, and the unlikely existence of the sockpuppet, but that's not proof is it?
Although this sounds like you're being patronizing, I'll answer it anyway.
Re: the writing styles
Perhaps you should research stylometry. Further, the person who makes the claim needs to point out the similarities, individually. Not just say, "the two styles are the same".
Re: Similar life experiences
I expect you're referring to the "cease and desist", CPS, and the appendicitis. Considering the emails I've received concerning Penn Mommy, perhaps she was parroting some of P-Momma's posts. It's a possibility, and one I don't discount. However, since PennMommy's son died of appendicitis before P-Momma's daughter, that would require clairvoyance.
Re: the same computer
Well, P-Momma hasn't claimed that they were always on the same computer. If they were to find comments by Penn Mommy made prior to her emergency trip to Bakersfield, then that would support their hypothesis.
@ buddhadoesnotdeliver:
Yes, Penn Mommy's son did die. As far as her knowledge of the Gosselin family, I have no idea.
If it's any consolation, I'm confused to. I know what P-Momma's side of the story is, but the other's story constantly changes. I've seen accusations of everything from Munchausens to an email from DaReal Truth claiming that P-Momma was doing it for a TV show (along with two other possibilities).
Basically, the other side is not only trying to make the evidence fit the crime, but also the motive(s).
@ Curious (second comment):
Re: their 'cause'
If they bought everything she said without first researching it, and trying to find external corroborative evidence, yes it does. I can sympathize with them, if that was the case. However, it will be much worse for their 'cause' if it turns out they falsely accused someone else.
Re: the evidence
Unfortunately, this isn't a court of law. Any of the evidence presented would have to be of a personal nature. Since it's P-Momma's family, I wouldn't even ask her to put herself in the position of having to choose. If it was a closed court, where once innocence was proven that would be it, then hell yes there would be much more at stake.
However, the other side is asking for proof that I would personally not be willing to give. Given how casually, not to mention irresponsibly, they threw around P-Momma's private information (and even that of others outside this drama) I wouldn't dare trust them with that of someone else.
I still hold to the "innocent until proven guilty" methodology of trial. Not only has the "other side" not shown P-Momma's guilt, but their desperation to prove their case has undermined it. A booklist with a 1:16 ration of the name they've given it, a family tree that doesn't show the side of the family that Penn Mommy is on, and several other things that I've listed in my post.
The one making the claim has to support it. They are claiming that P-Momma is Penn Mommy, and the reason she is doing it is Munchausens. However, there isn't a bit of evidence that has been given that wasn't easy to debunk. The real tell for me, is their shifting of goalposts. They don't even debate a piece of evidence once you've pointed out the problems with their thinking. Instead, they move onto the next one as if it's the first evidence presented.
Further, Calladus, Possummomma, and I actually post under our Blogger accounts. We don't try to hide behind "anonymous" or made up one shot names. Granted, the evidence isn't effected by who presents it, but when they refuse to let you know who they actually are and then provide such flimsy evidence it comes back to what I said in this post. It seems that they need a scapegoat.
Curious,
The problem that you're running into is a duel problem. First, the Atheist community has no connection to Penn Mommy, but we do know Possummomma. She's our friend, and she's someone that has proven herself trustworthy to the local Atheist community.
She's done this by meeting local Atheists in the Bakersfield area, by participating in a podcast or two, by meeting me, by becoming friends with Berlzebub over the phone. There are others.
In the fictional trial described by Berlzebub, Possummomma would have a lot of character witnesses.
But that leads to a second problem. Possummomma isn't on trial. The evidence so far presented doesn't meet minimum requirements for circumstantial evidence. And it is being presented too often by faceless people, sockpuppets, just as Possummomma is being accused.
A defendant has the right to know the accuser.
And the quality of investigative effort is obviously lacking. No one has yet to contact me about Possummomma - and due to my being out as the leader of a local Atheist / Skeptic organization, I am very easy to contact. The people involved don't care to do so - they are content with their own "truth".
The crux of the second problem is that the Atheist / Skeptic community has developed a very strong aversion to the claim that "lack of evidence is evidence of lack". We write long blog essays on the "Burden of Proof". We see no need to prove that Possummomma is innocent because the so called evidence that she is guilty is, as I've said, weak at best.
I'll give you an object lesson. If I were to create 5 sock puppets that talked about your life as a pedophile, you would not be able to prove yourself innocent even with all the resources of Google and every blog in existence at your disposal. Even a full time Private Eye and a team of investigators would have to work for several months to show that you are not now, and never have been a pedophile - but even then they would not know for sure.
Instead, your biggest asset would be the character references of your friends.
And yes, I understand that would be the defense of a negative claim instead of a positive claim, so the situation isn't identical - Possummomma has only to show up, side by side, with Pennmommy to prove her innocence.
Or does she? If that were to happen in full color video on YouTube, would the Gosslelin fan club back down and admit they were wrong, or would they claim that Possummomma, the evil genius that she is, merely got a willing patsy to help her out?
This is a separate issue that I see - the Atheist community has strongly supported Possummomma in her time of need, and in doing so we have not given the Gosslelin fan club a graceful way to retreat while saving face. Because they don't have that avenue of retreat, it would take overwhelming evidence to discredit them, and in doing so I'm not sure that some of them would be capable of accepting blame for their actions.
Having said that and in response to the thrust of your question, yes, if I found out that Possummomma made up everything, it would change the nature of our relationship. How could it not? However, I would not abandon her as a friend. I like her and her family, and I think they'd need to actually pull a gun on me before I started re-evaluating them as friends.
But I would not back down from posting my admission of being wrong in my blog. It would be the right thing to do, however painful.
Berlzebub,
You and Calladus have been true friends and warriors for Pmomma's cause. I think anyone would be grateful to have you two plus so many other posters in their corner. It is evident to me that this ongoing debate has to have been both time consuming and an emotional drain on you. I have read both the opposing blogs and Pmomma's comments and understand that there is a lot of circumstantial "evidence". I don't like the fact that GDNNOP has put the lid on the subject - too much censorship for my taste. On the other hand, I don't feel that Pmomma's comments really clear up anything at all. I understand and support the fact that names and personal info shouldn't be written online, but I think in the interest of clearing her name, a more direct response would help. If she doesn't want to be specific online, I would hope that she has been specific with you as far as who, what, when, where and why. If you, in the interest of friendship and loyalty, are going to continue to go to bat for her, I think you deserve the facts. After all, you have a credible blog, as does Calladus, and I would suspect that you value this credibility. So, I guess I am asking, in this particular situation, has she been as good a friend to you as you have been to her. And by this, I mean sharing confidences so that you have a clear understanding of what transpired as you continue to support her on YOUR blog. Thanks for your time.
@ Calladus:
Very well said.
@ Joanne:
She's shared a great deal with me, via email and phone, that I'm not at liberty to discuss on the WWW. Actually, Calladus and several others have been included in some of the emails. So, no, she hasn't kept us in the dark.
Calludus,
Thank you for your response. I think you and B. are very good friends, and I do appreciate your willingness to engage about this at all. You are tolerating more than I probably would. In that spirit, may I disagree?
You may not think that the circumstantial evidence is enough to put P-M "on trial," but I do. I don't have your experience of her, so I can't factor that into my judgment. Nor do I know her character witnesses. I am guessing that you don't have my experience of where Penn Mommy supposedly lives. And that doesn't make me "unthinking," just the opposite. I can't ignore what I know any more than you can't ignore what you know. You offer an example of proof, showing up on YouTube, and say that it wouldn't be accepted (probably true.) But it's not the only proof that can be offered. There doesn't even have to be an obituary. Something should have been written locally about Jason, if he existed. I live where this is supposed to be taking place. He doesn't seem to exist here. No high school record that I can find. No friends that I can find. That is not solid proof that he is invented, but it is unusual. Can you admit that? It is enough for me to question it. I am in no way one of the bloggers who "outed" your friend (supposedly.) I have no proof at all about this whole thing, and can't offer anything. I am curious, and yes, suspicious. I really do wish you'd try to defend your friend with real proof, if you can, regardless of what atheists write long blog essays about. It may not be the methodology of trial that you ascribe to, but it sure would be awfully nice of you to do so.
Berlzebub,
Thank you also for your response. I apologize if I seemed patronizing. Did you read my questions as sarcastic, when I really meant them as sincere? The list I presented: writing styles, life experiences, the computer, are not my accusations. Nor do I think any of them are slam-dunk, case-closed evidence against anyone. As I said, really don't think they are proof. I think they are enough to raise questions, though.
Please correct me if I misunderstand you: I think you have offered something that would constitute proof: evidence that Penn Mommy was using the Possummomma IP address before William became ill. Good challenge!
Regarding the "cause:" There are 2 Gosselin camps. I think you are confusing the two, and I have a feeling you don't want me to bother explaining it since it's not that important.
There is one more thing....did the little daughter of your friend die of appendicitis? You wrote, "However, since PennMommy's son died of appendicitis before P-Momma's daughter, that would require clairvoyance." Yikes!
I really don't think satisfying my curiosity is worth the health of your friend, so please delete this post if it is too upsetting.
Never mind about the little daughter...I followed a link from Callandus' blog to a post from P-M that says she's fine. Glad to read it!
I would hope that she has been specific with you as far as who, what, when, where and why.
(nodding) That would be something that a friend would tell a friend, wouldn't it? And a friend confided in wouldn't be worth much if they gave up that confidence.
What I can't figure out is why they turned so quickly on the notion that GDNNOP was truthful. I've read back and find post, after post, after post from the "hurt" people talking about how slimey GDNNOP are. They still accepted their consipracy theory hook line and sinker without investigating on their own.
Possummomma -
Speaking from my point of view (someone who doesn't know anyone personally and followed the Pennmommy blog from early on) at first a lot of people did not believe GDNNOP. GDNNOP didn't exactly create a precedent of reasonableness when the Pennmommy blog was unmoderated.
Then the blog closed, then GDNNOP wrote their post, people on other sites wrote in support of Pennmommy and, in some cases, you. The site for Jason became known, and also the creation of private blogs that included Pennmommy. Then all of that shut down and almost all blog entries concerning Pennmommy just completely disappeared without explanation,including the private blogs, except for the ones on Bohemian Moon's site. While GDNNOP started the flurry, it wasn't the only flurrying going on.
I would say that at that point a lot of people switched, and took the story "hook, line and sinker." The abrupt information blackout, in my opinion, contributed a lot to that. Once people realized something was amiss, then Penn mommy lied about everything. Other people such as me took a wait and see approach. No I did not personally investigate anything. Even if I had the time, I had no interest or emotional connection to any of the main people involved.
In reading the posts today it seems as though the "truth" is somewhere in between. There were some lies that Pennmommy told, but the whole sock puppet/Munchansen angle seems farfetched. Your friends have definitely been an effective advocate for you and made many thoughtful points. I am truly sorry that Pennmommy lost a son and I am sorry your children were also dragged through the mud by overzealous bloggers.
There's no obituary, but so what? If Penn Mommy is real, at this point she'd be nuts to put an obit online.
There was an obit. I was told that the family kept it off-line because of the privacy issues they were having. A group of his homeschool buddies had a memorial hike for him today. The information leading up to the hike was publicly viewable until this morning. People keep bringing up USC not having a report. I have no idea if they did or not. At the time of his death, they were dealing with a virus that sent 200 students to the health center. I believe this is what they told him he had when he went in on the 11th or 12th. School started for him on the 29th or around that time so he had only been there eight days before getting hospitalized. The school has 30,000 students. Publishing personal information is at the discretion of the parents since he was under 18.
However, I read Penn Mommy's blog and noticed something 'off' that hasn't been posted yet. I suspect that maybe she is a sockpuppet.
Her entire pseudonym was a sockpuppet for herself.
buddhadoesntdeliver said... I am confused.
Join the club!
PennMommy is a real relative, but did her son really die?
Yes, he did.
Did the situation have any bit of truth to it? Does she even know the Gosselin Family?
I haven't seen the total content of Pennmommy's writing so I'm not the right person to say how much of that situation was accurate. Since she was including the Gosselins in her Christmas letters four yeras ago for prayer requests I don't think she made up her role in helping. I have heard conflicting stories from other relatives about her involvement.
PossumMomma, I am sorry if these people are accusing you of something you really didn't have a part of.
Thank you.
@ Curious -It is easier to prove someone you know does exist than to prove someone you can't know does not exist.
There has been evidence that I exist thrown around carelessly. That also goes for the other innocent people GDNNOP said were sockpuppets. Pennmommy has been identified. I've seen her name on blogs with phone numbers before they got deleted by google. Calladus called me and we went over how it's impossible for me to prove that I'm not her. It is trying to prove a negative when you think about it carefully. If I made a video there would be people saying I "found a patsy".
Perhaps the unthinking masses would be smaller if Possummomma's defenders offered a better defense?
You have to admit that we are at a disadvantage not knowing what she's said and done. I have four kids which means I don't have time to do elaborate debunkings to the ever changing standards asked for.
Berlzebub hit the other part which is how careless people were with my private information. I wouldn't be a moral person if I gave the JnKCult Masses this info. They've shown their colors.
@ Joanne who said - If you, in the interest of friendship and loyalty, are going to continue to go to bat for her, I think you deserve the facts.
They have had the facts.
So, I guess I am asking, in this particular situation, has she been as good a friend to you as you have been to her. And by this, I mean sharing confidences so that you have a clear understanding of what transpired as you continue to support her on YOUR blog. Thanks for your time.
I don't know what to say to this. I don't hide from my friends. People who read my blog know that. How could I have eight years of internet friendships if my habit was making sock puppets with other identities? Where would I hide my husband and children on visits?
Pennmommy hurt people. I hope she makes amends with them. She hurt my family with this. She has nothing to gain by coming out. It's sad that she doesn't care that I've lost something from her use of my family. Our family has divided over this. That's worse than internet punishments.
PMomma,
I'm sorry your family is divided over this. I didn't realize there was so much back story re: your family in all this. It's pretty ridiculous, isn't it? Anyway, I hope things settle down...and soon!
*Raises hand* Also, confused here. A lot of quotes have been removed, including one here, but I thought I read that possummomma thought pennmommy set her up. I don't know if she said it, or if it was someone on another blog. So, is this true? If so, it appears that pennmommy was telling the truth about all of it (I think, at least by possummomma's account, but I'm still confused about the parroting of her blog), so why would pennmommy want it to lead back to someone who has been online for a while, and is from CA when pennmommy claims to be from PA? It's fairly easy to sockpuppet without giving any information other than an ip. As we've seen here, people can make up an account in google in minutes, and don't have to include personal information. Pennmommy could have used a new account, and as long as she didn't say anything that could be traced online, no one would ever know who she was.
None of this really makes any sense to me. I've been trying to follow it, but everytime I think I've got it right, something like this makes me question myself. I guess that's the point.
Curious - first I believe you've demonstrated that the "unthinking" label no longer applies to you.
On me providing evidence:
Yes it would be nice if I could provide proof that you and others would find acceptable. But in doing so I would be leaving Possummomma in an exposed position, and tell things that she has told me in confidence.
Do you have a friend that you share secrets with? Why don't you talk about your friend here? Post her full name, the city she lives in, and a photo of her child. Tell me something about her and her child that leaves them both vulnerable.
On you providing evidence:
You believe the circumstantial evidence is enough to at least start a Possummomma trial. In the GDNNOP world, that trail has already been held, and Possummomma was convicted in absentia and sentenced by a kangaroo court that suppressed opposing opinion. In the Atheist world we've yet to see enough solid evidence to cause us to question Possummomma. Frankly, I've seen better put together and more cohesive cases in support of Biblical prophesy.
I can see from your viewpoint and understand the reasoning that you think Pennmommy is invented. You've looked where you think she is, and can't find her. But I have problems with your standard of evidence.
My apologies, but when you say that there is "No high school record that I can find" that immediately makes me question your abilities and ethics. You have just placed yourself in the role of an "expert witness" and now I need to know just how "expert" you are.
Are you a trained investigator with access to databases that are usually kept confidential to those without an investigator's license? Some of those databases are open to the general public, but require a fee to access, some require both a fee and a state license. If you are an investigator, please tell me your investigator's license number and the state in which you work.
Did you access this information from a position of authority, for example do you work in the school district? Are there laws that forbid you from searching school records merely to satisfy your curiosity? If you are in a position of authority then telling me anything that you've found is a breech of conduct - you would be taking a large risk. And if you are comfortable in taking such a dishonest position, then why should I believe that you are telling the truth to me now?
If you are not in a position where you have access to the school database, then why should I think that your search of high school records is valid or comprehensive?
But perhaps you are not an expert witness and there is a database that is open and accessible - it probably gives nothing more than names and years of attendance. If this is the case, then it should also be accessible to me, and you should link to it so that I can verify it independently. Otherwise, it is merely hearsay to me from you. And hearsay is not evidence. As nice as you seem, you are still hiding your identity. I don't know you or your motives.
My apologies for turning something you've said into an object lesson, but this is the standard of evidence that has been presented, over and over. No way to independently verify it and no credible witnesses. Atheists and Skeptics see this sort of thing all the time and we learned to recognize and dismiss poor evidence. The problem is that too many people do NOT recognize poor evidence.
We are in the position of being nibbled to death by ducks, refuting the evidence of one duck doesn't make the flock go away, it just brings in another. And the duck so refuted doesn't admit defeat either, it merely goes back to the end of the line, to appear again later.
On Possummomma or Pennmommy providing evidence:
In the best case scenario, Pennmommy would be the right person to provide evidence. I'm thinking a coroner's report and full confession online might just settle things. But if she is real then only a cad would insist on such a thing. And if she is real, she will have her own motivation for what she does. Being real does not mean that she is interested in proving anything.
In the next best case scenario Possummomma would spill the beans about Pennmommy. We both know that would be insufficient to overturn her conviction in the kangaroo court, and that it is unnecessary for the Atheist community that supports her.
I was just wondering if you know that the private message board is actually ran by and opened to only gosselin haters. Why are they emailing you information. So to me it appears that both sides think that possum mama is guilty? I am somewhat confused.
The talk about the secret message board...the only site that has a secret message board is Gosselins Without Pity (not GDNNOP). So, if you are getting messages from this group, that shows that possum has been posting with this group for a long time and has become a trusted member of their inner circle.
The secret board was developed prior to GWoP opening, and was started by a group of posters from the now defunct Gosselin thread on TWoP. Possum was posting on that thread back then under jhawksgirl. GWoP was then started and possum commented on there and stated that she knew someone with inside information about the Gosselins.
How does Possum explain that fact that she is still an active member of TWoP? How does she explain that she has posts on both GWoP the secret message board?
Is Possum now trying to say that her blogger ID was stolen by Penn Mommy? So, for months and months her identity was randomly stolen by a distant relative, before said relative went to stay with her?
How does Possum explain the similarities in writing style (for a more comprehensive look at the writing style comparisons, go to http://blogs.abcnews.com/health_insider/2008/10/death-and-decep.html and look at the comments by none-so-blind.
Besides the evidence of the IP being the same (and her IP does not change at all) for months and months.
At this point, you are being willfully ignorant. You are grasping at straws to try to protect a friend. If you wanted to be a true friend, you'd call her on this crap (not cover for her).
We're not in a criminal courtroom, which is the only place that a case has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Why? Because police actually have technology. They could cease PM's computer and get all of the evidence they would need.
It's unfair to hold that site to that standard. They're not the FBI. There is, however, a preponderance of evidence to suggest that this very likely was an internet hoax.
Forget the obituary, how do you explain the students at the school Penn Mommy's son attending stating that no student died that week of an appendicitis? Are they all liars too, out to get Possum Momma?
Thank you, everyone, for entertaining my questions and answering them thoughtfully. I appreciate your defense and arguments. You have not shut down the discussion like the accusers!
I will be reading, but I do expect that this whole mess will disappear sometime soon. Perhaps your Possummomma will have a public blog again by the new year. I'll be checking back, because I really never read this much-beloved blog.
So, if you are getting messages from this group, that shows that possum has been posting with this group for a long time and has become a trusted member of their inner circle.
No it doesn't. It shows that someone posted under that name which I know isn't jhawksgirl because jhawksgirl is a banned account from what looks like her talking about an opinion for a PBS documentary. I had this confirmed by a TWoP mod/admin. Jhawksgirl hasn't made a post to that site in almost two years.
Pennmommy is Possummommas extended family so why couldn't she go the distance with a four month impersonation? One of the members of the private blog told me they had to chase the person you are accusing of being possummoma down. Didn't possummomma, the real possummomma, not post there frequently if at all for the last year? Before pennmommy started up how often did she post? You may have missed the fact that her computer was hacked seriously. Pennmommy and William had changed the settings to allow them remote access and keystroke copying. Possummomma's husband had to re-configure their network to fix the situation Pennmommy caused. If you have been told this all happened on one computer then you are being lied to because I have five IPs figuring into this. Pennmommy used four computer bases. Possummomma's house network. Possummommas parents house. A B and B near Tehachapi. Pennmommy's house. And a Los Angeles wifi. The fifth I haven't identified. It registers to Washnington DC. Maybe I'm not supposed to share that. Pennmommy did this before or did you miss that? She impersonated another relative that was welcoming to her between 2005-2006. You are dealing with a dishonest person but it's not possummomma. Pennmommy isn't stupid and naive like she wanted you to think. The deception on the Gosselin blog is not what is tearing the family in two factions. It's a small part of the problem. The bigger problem is one of identity fraud on two family members in three years. Pennmommy didn't stop with impersonating possummomma in blogs that could back up her opinion on reality tv. Just the problems beyond that are not for public gossip.
I think Pennmommy got her kharmic justice. She won't get her son back. That's why possummomma is taking a high road.
I am guessing that you don't have my experience of where Penn Mommy supposedly lives.
Curious, in the spirit in that you came in, I would like to ask you to consider this I am about to say.
You say your experience from living in the area pennmommy claims to live in makes you sure possummomma is sock puppeting pennmommy. How does that work? Pennmommy made claims. Those are her claims to defend, not possummommas. How does your knowledge of a geographical area reflect on the innocence or guilt of possummomm? She never claimed to live in your area. In this case, she was so open about her life that she (possummomma) was easily identified. People like Calladus and Berlzebub **are** in her area, have met her **and** her family (including four children of verbal age and two of an age to make lying difficult), have met her husband, and have never noted inconsistencies in her life story. Which do you think is more qualified to judge possummomma's character? You live around where Pennmommy says she is from and you can't find a school reference to her son. Possummomma isn't saying Pennmommy was truthful - Possummomma has said pennmommy lied about the living arrangements or her children. A memorial hike announcement in a newspaper was written to invite alumni of a human school group. I assumed that would mean there aren't school records for Jason in Pennsylvania. Absense of school records in your locale doesn't prove a person is a sockpuppet. If that were the case, especially in Pennsylvania, the Amish would be the single largest sockpuppet group in the world! Moreover, prove to me that I didn't go to school in Alaska. You can't.
So, if you are getting messages from this group, that shows that possum has been posting with this group for a long time and has become a trusted member of their inner circle.
Your mistake lies in assuming possummomma was posting and not pennmommy. I could kype your name in a second and post in a message board using your name. It's not hard. If I had access to your computer it would would be a walk in the park. The members of the message board trusted someone who they thought was possummomma. Pennmommy posted details about possummommas family well enough to get people to believe her. That's not unheard of in this www world. How do you think identity fraud works? If you can believe possummomma with nothing to gain by this would sockpuppet pennmommy, why can't pennmommy have sockpuppeted possummomma to gain credibility or respect? Possummomma never claimed to be a Gosselin helper from Pennsylvania and all you've shown is that she's not a Gosselin helper from Pennsylvania. Gee whiz! Can you prove next that Berlzebub isn't realy the devil?
It's unfair to hold that site to that standard. They're not the FBI
It's unfair of you to hold possummomma responsible for proving she's not Pennmommy (it's almost impossible to prove a negative claim), but you're still doing it.
how do you explain the students at the school Penn Mommy's son attending stating that no student died that week of an appendicitis? Are they all liars too, out to get Possum Momma?
They're students in a school of 16,000 undergraduates and 17,000 graduate students who may not have kept track of their classmate of eight days who died as a protected minor of an infection and stroke following an appendectomy.
@ Not Berlzebub, But I Can't Prove It
You're post addressed parts of other posts. Only the first of these was from one of my posts. I will respond to that, and let Seriously handle the rest, since they are from his/her comments.
You write: You say your experience from living in the area pennmommy claims to live in makes you sure possummomma is sock puppeting pennmommy. No I didn't. I said: "You may not think that the circumstantial evidence is enough to put P-M 'on trial,' but I do." I also said, "I have no proof at all about this whole thing, and can't offer anything. I am curious, and yes, suspicious."
As for my geographical knowledge, I have not claimed that it is more than something that seems "off." I emailed the moderator about it b/c he asked. I did not post b/c it is a "molehill, not a mountain," but if I were to type it out online, it could be made into a mountain by those wishing to discredit P-Momma. I know it isn't proof. And I want proof. I do not need anymore coincidences or confusing, blog-hijacking explanations. I do not wish to add fuel to the fire for either side.
You write: How does your knowledge of a geographical area reflect on the innocence or guilt of possummomm? She never claimed to live in your area. In this case, she was so open about her life that she (possummomma) was easily identified.
Penn Mommy did claim to live around here. If it can be shown that she does not live around here, it would be weightier evidence against her existence. Really, if she's not real, who wrote her blog? That is why Possummomma is involved. Possummomma acknowledges that her accounts were used, so, if Penn Mommy is invented, the logical conclusion is that Possummomma is the inventor. For the record: I understand that P-Momma's defense against this upsetting accusation is that Penn Mommy is real, and she has hijacked Possummomma's various Internet names/accounts while staying at her home.
I asked Berlzebub earlier what IP evidence would convince him that P-Momma was lying about that, and (I think) he indicated that IP proof that Penn Mommy was using Possummomma's accounts before the son became ill would consitute weighter evidence (am I wrong, B.?)
The poster Seriously said above that such proof exists, but he/she has not produced the evidence. In the post above, Seriously says, "Is Possum now trying to say that her blogger ID was stolen by Penn Mommy? So, for months and months her identity was randomly stolen by a distant relative, before said relative went to stay with her?"
Calladus and B. have both said that they have evidence that satisfies them that Possummomma is not lying, but they will not produce it b/c that would betray a confidence. I accept their reason. I believe I will not be seeing evidence from Possummomma herself either, b/c of real-life confidences with her family.
Regarding the high school records: I am referring only to publically available documents. No ethical standards were breached. No expert investigations conducted.
In conclusion, I am a seeker of information here, not an accuser. I have no proof one way or other. I "have faith" that one side can actually prove its claims, but I still don't know which side that is, and this may all die down and fade away before that happens.
I think it's a little unfair to say that gdnnop jumped to conclusions and made over the top assumptions here. It's not like they found Possum's blog and went looking for a way to tie her in with Pennmommy. If they were saying that just because there was someone using a name that could be linked to possum, I would agree with possum's defenders. That wasn't the case. The name, the matching ip's, and the picture of the supposedly deceased son were enough to tie possum to pennmommy. Add to that the fact that there were several similarities between possummommas blog and pennmommys stories(ie cps, appendicitis, "cease and desist" letter).
Okay so maybe these could all be coincidence, but the response from Possum is that pennmommy is a family member who is using her internet connection to set her up. This proved that there was a connection. If possum had denied it altogether, there would still be at least a reasonable doubt for me.
It's much easier to believe that this person was making up stories and got caught than it is to believe that the person at which the evidence is pointing is just an innocent victim of an unstable family member and her son.
One thing that is really confusing to me is possummomma's claim that pennmommy was telling the truth about her son and her relationship with the Gosselin family, which are really the only things the accusers care about. The assumption is that she lied about that relationship to get attention and when she got in over her head, made up the story about her son to take the attention away from it and discredit her adversaries(claiming they called the hospital, stalked her family, etc).
Pennmommy set possum up by telling the truth? That doesn't make any sense.
What I'm saying is that gdnnop or it's readers weren't out to help pennmommy with the frame up. Penn lead them to Possum. To be quite honest, I don't appreciate being referred to as a "rabbid fan" because I post on a certain blog. Possum needs to, IF her story is true, take it up with Penn and leave the rest of us out of it. Yeah, I guess if she was framed that really sucks for her, but gdnnop didn't do it, they exposed it. I don't think gdnnop owes possum anything. Why would they retract their statements when possum hasn't offered anything but excuses to debunk the evidence against her? There is far more evidence against her than she can or has provided in her favor. Again, IF she is just a victim, (I don't believe that's the case, but I understand there are people that do) it is her choice to use whatever she may have to prove herself at the risk of "outing" pennmommy. That is her only defense. If she chooses not to use it, that's her problem. I think it's awfully nice of her to withhold such information in order to protect a person who has caused her family such grief. That must just be her saintly nature.
I have to hand it to her, though. She has, once again, managed to take the heat off of herself, at least in this community, and place it on someone else. Gdnnop is only responsible for putting the info out there. They didn't make this mess, so I think some of you need to redirect your anger.
Do you have any thoughts on Julie vouching for Penn Mommy?
@tiredofthebs
That is a very well-written post. There are a lot of coincidences to swallow with this, and the truth matters.
Can anyone show links/IP proof that Possum's computer identity was being used at these Gosselin blogs before Jason Haas started school in August?
I have seen one comment from Atheist in a Minivan on the anti-Gosselin blog, Gosselin's Without Pity, from June 3, 2008. The original post is called, "Is Kate Toxic?" and it was posted on May 25th. Link: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6454349132986954975&postID=6535960414316337001
Isn't that Possum? Are there others? There are accusations that there are, but is there proof?
If you have been told this all happened on one computer then you are being lied to because I have five IPs figuring into this. Pennmommy used four computer bases. Possummomma's house network. Possummommas parents house. A B and B near Tehachapi. Pennmommy's house. And a Los Angeles wifi. The fifth I haven't identified. It registers to Washnington DC. Maybe I'm not supposed to share that.
So are you a blog owner? I may be wrong, but wouldn't pennmommy and possummomma have had to both post there during this time period for you to have this information? Can you provide a link?
Pennmommy did this before or did you miss that? She impersonated another relative that was welcoming to her between 2005-2006.
Was this an online impersonation? Can you provide links to support this?
OK, I have taken my own advice and went to one blog, Gosselins Without Pity, (blog link: http://gosselinswithoutpity.blogspot.com) to search for more of Possum’s comments.
On July 1st, in the comments for blog entry “Aunt Jodi: The Tribe Has Spoken,” atheist in a minivan explains where the poster Bananabethanna is. Link: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6454349132986954975&postID=1078315215144083243
Bananabethanna is a poster who claimed to have friends who knew the Gosselins and had negative, detailed, ‘insider information.’ See her comments from June 20th in the blog entry (originally posted June 15th,) “Where are the Grandparents?” Link: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6454349132986954975&postID=7147815673526155490
From one of the three comments she posts here, she implies that she was a member of the Gosselins’ church when they were expecting the sextuplets, and after delivery. That would make Bananabethanna a Pennsylvanian at the time. It is a well-established fact that the Gosselin’s live and attended church in PA. (link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_and_kate.)
Berlezebub could verify this better than I can, but Bananabethanna was also a poster at his blog. On January 27th and 28th Berlzebub and his readers were raising funds for Possummomma’s health needs (window film.) In the blog entry, "P-Family Donations Update #21,” a poster called chief illinewek questions whether Possum is really sick and deserving of the funds. Berlzebub raises the possibility of a conspiracy theory or sockpuppeting on Possum’s part, but dismisses those as ridiculous. It is the defense of a good friend. In the post, chief challenges someone to tell what good things Possum has done for them. Bananbethanna writes in that Possum provided her with “A life time of support. When my husband had cancer she prepared a weeks worth of food for me and brought my husband a home created book of funny stories, jokes, cartoons, and neat mental puzzles to keep him occupied. She got us a Netflix subscription and funded it the entire six months he was on chemo.” The link is here: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8801748118575241094&postID=8239258361493605656
Anyway that would make Bananabethanna a Californian at the time, since no one in Bakersfield, CA prepares weeks of food for a Pennsylvanian. So, Possum’s friend, Bananabethanna knew the Gosselin’s when she went to their church in 2005, then moved to within driving distance of Bakersfield, where her life time-supportive friend Possum made her meals when her husband was sick.
Or, Bananabethanna is a sockpuppet. What would Occam's Razor say?
I could list the “coincidences” side-by-side with the accusation: “She sockpuppets.” I am leaning toward the simpler explanation.
Curious,
Atheist in a Minivan posted on GWOP on July 1 also. Here is the link: http://gosselinswithoutpity.blogspot.com/2008/06/aunt-jodi-tribe-has-spoken.html
It appears that Possummomma knows two Gosselin "insiders". One, of course, is Pennmommy. The second is Bananabethanna who also posted on GWOP. https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6454349132986954975&postID=7147815673526155490
I noticed that Bananabethanna posted on Berlzebub's blog several times in January and even offered a character reference for Possummomma.
People need to R-E-A-D before jumping to conclusions.
Possummomma's various Internet names/accounts while staying at her home
This has been addressed more than six times in this thread. N-O! Here's what was found:
I have five IPs figuring into this. Pennmommy used four computer bases. Possummomma's house network. Possummommas parents house. A B and B near Tehachapi. Pennmommy's house. And a Los Angeles wifi. The fifth I haven't identified. It registers to Washnington DC.
know it isn't proof. And I want proof. I do not need anymore coincidences or confusing, blog-hijacking explanations.
Quit using the word coincidence. What pennmommy did to possummomma is not coincidental. You want "proof" and answers, you say. We're trying to give you that. But, you keep moving the goal posts. What you want or need is not always what you get. Go back to the basics - GDNNOP had no connection to possummomma before her relative uploaded a picture to her picasa account. That's it. Every other piece of "alleged" evidence was presented with a goal in mind. That goal was making people believe pennmommy was a sockpuppet of possummomma. The book lists for example were unrelated to the Gosselins or pennmommy. Two books on that list were about an interesting psychological diagnosis. Thus she must have the diagnosis? In what world? Why aren't the other books part of the "circumstancial" evidence? Instead of investigating pennmommy, they investigated possummomma who has only been proven to be who she says she is. Wrong way.
For the record: I understand that P-Momma's defense against this upsetting accusation is that Penn Mommy is real, and she has hijacked Possummomma's various Internet names/accounts while staying at her home.
It's not "her defense" - it's the reality. You can choose to accept it or not. Again, you know Calladus, Berlzebub, and others are real people with the entire story (even pennmommy's name and IPs not for California). Moreover, they've known possummomma a long time whereas the accusers have never met possummomma or sat at her computer and her mother's computer (as I have) to figure this out.
Really, if she's not real, who wrote her blog?
She is real. What if you're not real? Who's writing your blog?
Possum now trying to say that her blogger ID was stolen by Penn Mommy?
Flipping Christ. No. Possummomma said Pennmommy used her name and reputation. Possummoma's blog was never hacked. Her e-mail was. Pennmommy inserted possummomma's name into the "Name/URL" anonymous comment option on other blogs.
Calladus and B. have both said that they have evidence that satisfies them that Possummomma is not lying, but they will not produce it b/c that would betray a confidence. I accept their reason.
Good.
I think it's a little unfair to say that gdnnop jumped to conclusions and made over the top assumptions here. It's not like they found Possum's blog and went looking for a way to tie her in with Pennmommy.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID! The only way they linked pennmommy to possummomma is when a relative uploaded a picture of Jason to possummomma's picasa web albums. After that, it was time to start shoving pieces in a puzzle and discarding the puzzle pieces they didn't like to build an incomplete puzzle that doesn't accurately reflect the picture on the box.
Add to that the fact that there were several similarities between possummommas blog and pennmommys stories(ie cps, appendicitis, "cease and desist" letter).
Is it time to bash our heads into walls?
One thing that is really confusing to me is possummomma's claim that pennmommy was telling the truth about her son and her relationship with the Gosselin family, which are really the only things the accusers care about.
That's sad.
The assumption is that she lied about that relationship to get attention and when she got in over her head, made up the story about her son to take the attention away from it and discredit her adversaries(claiming they called the hospital, stalked her family, etc).
That's not the assumption here. It may be on "the accusers" side. It's a faulty assumption.
Pennmommy used three comments on GWoP and GDNNOP combined using possummomma or jhawksgirl. The comment with "possummomma" was not logged in. The jhawksgirl use was used because possummommas mom was logged into AOL and possummommas daughter had been using AOL IM to chat. Similar to the picture being uploaded to an account that was always left open on two computers in different homes. If your spouse or child is logged into an account and you don't sign off before doing your business, you might show up as your spouse or child. If a relative was staying with you and didn't log you out, they could do the same on purpose or by accident. If someone installed remote access points on your computers, they could read your e-mail. One thing I found in fixing the security on possummomma (and parents) computer was that some e-mails sent to these people were deleted by a remote source who logged in and set all messages to go to another e-mail.
What I'm saying is that gdnnop or it's readers weren't out to help pennmommy with the frame up. Penn lead them to Possum.
Penn lead them to Possum so possum is guilty doesn't make sense either. What better way to get eyes off you than to point to another person?
IF her story is true, take it up with Penn and leave the rest of us out of it. Yeah, I guess if she was framed that really sucks for her, but gdnnop didn't do it, they exposed it. I don't think gdnnop owes possum anything.
The family is taking it up with Penn. Saying "leave us out of it" is funny when you started it. Why didn't you leave possummomma out of it? Possummomma has said she's "kind of glad" this was exposed when it was before it got worse. That's not an admission of her guilt. GDNNOP didn't make pennmommy do anything that's true. GDNNOP accused an innocent woman of being pennmommy.
That is her only defense. If she chooses not to use it, that's her problem.
Then you are immoral. It's not her only defense. It's the defense you want. This is akin to saying "if the molestation victim won't turn in her father, then it's her problem." What the fuck, lady?
I think it's awfully nice of her to withhold such information in order to protect a person who has caused her family such grief. That must just be her saintly nature.
Let me get this right - because she won't give the information to you, or the other members of the lynch mob, you assume she hasn't given it to the people who she trusts? Give me your social security number, name, and phone number! I also want your mom's information. If you don't give that information to me your mom doesn't exist. All I need is her adddress, social, phone number, full name, birthday to prove she exists. I promise the readers won't do anything bad with the information.
Prove you didn't write this post while you're at it. Prove you're not connected to GDNNOP. It's your blog according to this so it must be true.
Berlzebub,
The article at ABC News is interesting, but it's the comments that you want to look at. No fair skipping over the individual examples of writing style similarities. There aren't links there, but you should be able to access Possum's writing and compare it to Google Reader cached versions of Penn Mommy's and William's without someone handing you links. Check out the comments of None So Blind. He/she sees the "coincidence" of Bananabethanna knowing the Gosselins as church members AND being Possum's life long friend.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/health_insider/2008/10/death-and-decep.html
@daddy o
You wrote: If you have been told this all happened on one computer then you are being lied to because I have five IPs figuring into this. Pennmommy used four computer bases. Possummomma's house network. Possummommas parents house. A B and B near Tehachapi. Pennmommy's house. And a Los Angeles wifi. The fifth I haven't identified. It registers to Washnington DC. Maybe I'm not supposed to share that.
Are we supposed to know who you are? Are you Possum or Possum's husband? Why would you know this?
First you said 5 Ip's, then 4 computer bases, then list 5 things, and suggest another "fifth you haven't identified."
Are you counting things correctly? Are you well? You don't seem well.
Pennmommy set possum up by telling the truth? That doesn't make any sense.
That's not the claim against pennmommy. The claim is that pennmommy took advantage of hospitality. I know pennmommy stayed in this area because prepping her son for school took most of her summer. I read a post by pennmommy who said she arranged her flight schedules for the season to be on the west coast. Her ex-husband and Jason's father lives in the larger Bakersfield area too. Pennmommy used possummomma to gain credibility of support when she blogged about the Gosselins. She didn't know her son would die so how would she "pre-lie" about that? I don't think pennmommy got in over her head with the Gosselins. The cache of her blog shows a moderate opinion. I think pennmommy sock puppeted real people because she could point to real people if it was questioned. No one will know why Pennmommy felt like she needed support and faked supporters.
Possummomma is under pressure from her family not to expose pennmommy during a time to mourn. No one should think it means she will never expose her.
If possum had denied it altogether, there would still be at least a reasonable doubt for me.
LMAO! Right! You know damn well if possummomma had said "I swear it's not me. I don't even know what you're talking about." you wouldn't have treated her any differently. You'd be given high fives and screaming about how no one could possibly believe her innocence just as you are doing now. You don't care about the truth.
I'm going to repeat this. There was no IP match. Even on the site that started this, there was only a match on a site meter that corrolated to Bakersfield. Possummomma has admitted that an IP would be explainable. Blogger doesn't log IPs. At the time this happened pennmommy was posting on blogger so there would be no IP evidence of her location. Same goes for any of the other blogger posts. They accused possummomma of being pennmommy because of a site map and a photo. Possummomma's character is intact with me because she admits this situation looked bad to those of us who said it was fishy. The similarity of post topics were three posts out of possummommas over four hundred posts. I'm going to bet you that you can go to Berlie's blog and find twenty posts that are the same topic as possummommas within the last year. What does 3 out of 400+ prove? I know pennmommy was using possummomma. I know GDNNOP accused her of being Martin Wagner (he got the cease and desist, not possummomma!). She made a post about HIS cease and desist. It's possible that Penn got her wording and ideas from that post but get your facts straight before you accuse someone of fraud.
Re: Bananabethanna:
Actually, Bethanna left commments on my blog, but I can't find any where she used a Google screen name to do so. Everytime she's left a way for me to contact her, or contacted me herself, it's been through her Yahoo email account.
However, I noticed that the one who left the comment that was linked is mrsbananabethanna, who's been a member since June 2008.
Now, it doesn't prove that it is not Bethanna, but every time Bethanna has posted where I've seen, it's been as Bethanna or Bethannabanana, not (mrs)bananabethanna. I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that mrsbananabethanna is a sockpuppet, but I'm damn near positive the name was made up by someone.
To the poster that talked about Penn Mommy posting as Possum, entering her name in the "name/URL" section:
I haven't seen these posts on GWoP. What I have seen were posts by "atheist in a minivan" which is clearly possum's s/n. These were logged in comments.
Also, on GDNNOP, SOMEONE posted as Jhawksgirl1 through open ID. Must have had her password. So, those of you who are banging your head up against the wall acting as if people seeking information are dense, think about it.
You, yourselves, can't even keep the defenses straight. First someone said something like "Possum was, like, seriously hacked" and now...just her email.
It's making less and less sense as the days go on. How many mothers do you know that stay in the city their kid is going to college in for months to "get him settled?" That's ridiculous. Yet, you believe it.
You know why I know that's bull (other than the fact that it's laughable)? Because Penn Mommy NEVER mentioned it on her blog. She said that she had to fly to California when her son became sick. If she was there the whole time, why not just say it? It makes no sense to lie about flying somewhere, when, saying that you were staying there would have made the story all the more believable.
For people who value logic and reason, you seem to have put your head in the proverbial sand.
We're trying to give you that. But, you keep moving the goal posts.
Seriously? When this first started you all wanted the ip addresses, then when Possum tells the story, that point is moot. So then, you want a detailed essay about how the writing styles are similar. Well, ya got that too on the ABC post. That's still not enough. Now, there's just no way to prove it according to you. Talk about moving goal posts.
Go back to the basics - GDNNOP had no connection to possummomma before her relative uploaded a picture to her picasa account. That's it. Every other piece of "alleged" evidence was presented with a goal in mind. That goal was making people believe pennmommy was a sockpuppet of possummomma.
I'm sorry but this is laughable. Please tell me how to search for a picture on the internet. Is there something in google that I don't know about that allows you to upload a picture and search for it all over the net? You could got to images and search "picture of boy in hat", but I'm not even sure that would work. If you would actually go back and read the post on gdnnop, this whole thing started with a poster who claimed to be an "insider" living in PA. The mods called her out on it, because the ip showed Bakersfield, and I guess the ip was accurate in this situation because said poster came back with the excuse of visiting her mother in CA. After that, there were a few other posters with the same ip including jhawksgirl. Pennmommy got caught because she posted and matched the ips.
Now, google Jhawksgirl. This name has been used excessively on several boards and leads back to possummomma. I know you hate this word, but coincedentally enough, this person was from Bakesfield CA. Oh, and she has a blog. A blog that references at least 3 of the same topics as pennmommys blog, and the writing styles are similar. Let's not forget that she lists one her interests as medicine. Gee, all that medical knowledge could be really helpful to someone trying to put together a story based on her son's illness.
At this point, this all could be viewed as coincedence. Pennmommy is still not in much danger of being outed. But she can't stay away. After her blog is closed, she starts another one in memory of Jason complete with grainy picture. Gdnnop found the picture because they knew where to look.
The book lists for example were unrelated to the Gosselins or pennmommy. Two books on that list were about an interesting psychological diagnosis. Thus she must have the diagnosis? In what world? Why aren't the other books part of the "circumstancial" evidence?
The books don't stand on their own as evidence. They don't have to.
Instead of investigating pennmommy, they investigated possummomma who has only been proven to be who she says she is. Wrong way.
I'm going to ask you to take your own advice and try to keep up. No one is disputing that Possum is who she says she is.
It's not "her defense" - it's the reality. You can choose to accept it or not. Again, you know Calladus, Berlzebub, and others are real people with the entire story (even pennmommy's name and IPs not for California). Moreover, they've known possummomma a long time whereas the accusers have never met possummomma or sat at her computer and her mother's computer (as I have) to figure this out.
I'm sorry, but that is YOUR reality. I don't know who you are, but if you aren't Possum or a family member, you can only be basing what you say on what she's told you. If you are a family member, you have every reason to believe what she says or even lie for her, so excuse me if I'm not so trusting.
And no, I don't know Possum, that's an excellent point. I'm basing my conclusions on what I see and not on emotional investment.
Really, if she's not real, who wrote her blog?
She is real. What if you're not real? Who's writing your blog?
We've already covered this and I don't have a blog.
Possum now trying to say that her blogger ID was stolen by Penn Mommy?
Flipping Christ. No. Possummomma said Pennmommy used her name and reputation. Possummoma's blog was never hacked. Her e-mail was. Pennmommy inserted possummomma's name into the "Name/URL" anonymous comment option on other blogs.
Nope, wrong [url=http://gosselinswithoutpity.blogspot.com/2008/06/aunt-jodi-tribe-has-spoken.html]again[/url]
The name is highlighted in blue and is attached to her profile. This could only be done using that account. If she just typed the name in, it would show in black.
Calladus and B. have both said that they have evidence that satisfies them that Possummomma is not lying, but they will not produce it b/c that would betray a confidence. I accept their reason.
Good.
Well, I'm glad that they are satisfied, but I am not. Actually, at this point I really could care less about possum or penn and whoever else. What does piss me off, and I've said this already, that you are going after a blog for putting information out there. You're problem is with Pennmommy, if she exists. I also have a big problem with the implication that gdnnop somehow tried to set up possum. Do you know how stupid that sounds? What you believe to be true means nothing to me, I see what I see. And what I see, is a bunch of people telling me that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a hamster.
I think it's a little unfair to say that gdnnop jumped to conclusions and made over the top assumptions here. It's not like they found Possum's blog and went looking for a way to tie her in with Pennmommy.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID! The only way they linked pennmommy to possummomma is when a relative uploaded a picture of Jason to possummomma's picasa web albums. After that, it was time to start shoving pieces in a puzzle and discarding the puzzle pieces they didn't like to build an incomplete puzzle that doesn't accurately reflect the picture on the box.
Okay, covered this one too. Again I want to point out how silly it is to imply that gdnnop so desperately wanted to link pennmommy to possummomma. Must be because she is an athiest, right? She does seem to get a lot of grief for that, what with all the stalking.
Add to that the fact that there were several similarities between possummommas blog and pennmommys stories(ie cps, appendicitis, "cease and desist" letter).
Is it time to bash our heads into walls?
That's a bad idea. You obviously have enough trouble seeing clearly.
One thing that is really confusing to me is possummomma's claim that pennmommy was telling the truth about her son and her relationship with the Gosselin family, which are really the only things the accusers care about.
That's sad.
The assumption is that she lied about that relationship to get attention and when she got in over her head, made up the story about her son to take the attention away from it and discredit her adversaries(claiming they called the hospital, stalked her family, etc).
That's not the assumption here. It may be on "the accusers" side. It's a faulty assumption.
Really? Quack.
What I'm saying is that gdnnop or it's readers weren't out to help pennmommy with the frame up. Penn lead them to Possum.
Penn lead them to Possum so possum is guilty doesn't make sense either. What better way to get eyes off you than to point to another person?
If makes perfect sense. It may not be the smoking gun evidence that you are looking for, but it does make sense. What if gdnnop came back and said they didn't post the info on pennmommy? That the blog owners crazy cousin hacked into her computer and did it because she hates athiests. Would you buy that?
The family is taking it up with Penn. Saying "leave us out of it" is funny when you started it. Why didn't you leave possummomma out of it? Possummomma has said she's "kind of glad" this was exposed when it was before it got worse. That's not an admission of her guilt. GDNNOP didn't make pennmommy do anything that's true. GDNNOP accused an innocent woman of being pennmommy.
That is her only defense. If she chooses not to use it, that's her problem.
Then you are immoral. It's not her only defense. It's the defense you want. This is akin to saying "if the molestation victim won't turn in her father, then it's her problem." What the fuck, lady?
Let's get something staight here. I don't WANT pennmommy's info. I wouldn't have said that if I thought she was more than a sock.
I think it's awfully nice of her to withhold such information in order to protect a person who has caused her family such grief. That must just be her saintly nature.
Let me get this right - because she won't give the information to you, or the other members of the lynch mob, you assume she hasn't given it to the people who she trusts? Give me your social security number, name, and phone number! I also want your mom's information. If you don't give that information to me your mom doesn't exist. All I need is her adddress, social, phone number, full name, birthday to prove she exists. I promise the readers won't do anything bad with the information.
So now I'm a stalker? I think I'm starting to see how this works. I post something that you don't agree with, so then you start accusing me of being intrusive and asking for personal information. That's sort of the diversion tactic you mentioned earlier. Watch this hand while the other one steals your wallet.
The point I was making with the comment you are referencing is that it seems convenient that possum has worded things in a way that would lead one to believe that the only way she can prove herself is to give out info on Pennmommy, which she won't do because she says it "isn't my place". This puts her in a position that allows her to stop trying to prove herself while appearing to be noble in her effort to spare her family member.
Prove you didn't write this post while you're at it. Prove you're not connected to GDNNOP. It's your blog according to this
You think I would be defending them if I weren't? I'm not a mod, but I do post there occasionally. Why would you imply that I was trying to hide it? I think it's very obvious by my previous comment.
@ Tired:
I don't have much time to respond, but one thing you said is wrong.
Click on my name and see what comes up. (Hint, I'm not Calladus.) It's not difficult to get around those things.
Also, when she commented, or posted, blogger showed her as "possummomma", not "Atheist in a mini van".
You can click on the links provided, to see the difference.
So then who is [url=http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:xEo8wVoshv4J:possummomma.blogspot.com/2008/06/weird-emails.html+athiest+in+a+minivan+said&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&ie=UTF-8]this[/url]?
Hi, This is Calladus here. I'm posting as if I were Nina Bell to show something.
It's possible to actually FAKE the person you are posting as, even if you're posting a Google identity.
I know there's a lot of chum in the water, but work is taking priority now, and I'll have to get to it as I can.
Still, isn't this neat? As Nina Bell I could say "Calladus was right, and the Gosselin fan club was wrong!"
Okay, obviously my coding is off.
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:xEo8wVoshv4J:possummomma.blogspot.com/2008/06/weird-emails.html+athiest+in+a+minivan+said&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&ie=UTF-8
@ Tired:
You got me. Her blogger s/n hasn't always been possummomma. However, that wasn't the central part to my argument.
You said:
"The name is highlighted in blue and is attached to her profile. This could only be done using that account. If she just typed the name in, it would show in black."
[emphasis mine]
In my last comment, I demonstrated that wasn't the only way it could have been done. That's why I've been requesting IP addresses. If Penn Mommy has been commenting for a while it shouldn't be that difficult to find out where she's been posting from, considering that they figured out when Penn Mommy and P-Momma posted from the same IP address.
I'm honestly not sure what's going on. I have my suspicions, but, unlike some, I'm going to investigate before I start placing blame.
Also, just to clarify, who's comments are suspected to be P-Momma's sockpuppets? I've read insinuations that I'm even one of the suspects.
PS. Please look at this before you leave links. You're doing it wrong.
I'm honestly not sure what's going on. I have my suspicions, but, unlike some, I'm going to investigate before I start placing blame.
That's just it. I've done all of the research that I can do from this side. There is nothing verifiable as far as a link(which is as far as I am willing to go with this) to disprove my theories.
Also, just to clarify, who's comments are suspected to be P-Momma's sockpuppets? I've read insinuations that I'm even one of the suspects
I don't know if you are only addressing me, but yeah, I'll admit that at first the thought did cross my mind, but upon further examination of your blog(time in use, topics, tones) I no longer believe that is the case. I think you are a friend defending a friend, and therefore will understand why I'm here. I don't suspect anyone else, at least not here.
Oh and btw, thanks for the info on the links. The code I've been using works in other places and I didn't know there was any other way to do it.
@ Berlzebub
Who are daddy o, seriously curious, who am i?, and bri, or am i?? Are they all good friends of Possummomma's in whom she has confided? Why do they have all this computer information?
Berlzebub, do you know who these people are in real life? Are these the "several others" that you mentioned as having information from Possum? Can you verify that these several others are real people? Calladus is verifiable, but are the others?
@who am i?
You wrote: "I read a post by pennmommy who said she arranged her flight schedules for the season to be on the west coast. Her ex-husband and Jason's father lives in the larger Bakersfield area too." Where did you read that post from Penn Mommy? Becasue I read every post and comment that Penn Mommy wrote, and I never saw that post from Penn Mommy on her blog. So you know Penn Mommy? You know Jason's father who lives in the larger Bakersfield area? How do you know Jason's father? Isn't that a coincidence that you would know Jason's father (or at least where he lives) AND you know this computer stuff about Possum?
Berlzebub, Calladus, you are both good friends of Possum's. Did you know where Jason's father lived? Do you know how who am i? would get that information. Berlzebub, did you share the contents of my email with anyone? Or did someone just cover herself about the geographical discrepancies?
Thanks, who am i? This thinking Pennsylvania Mommy has just been spared the effort of calculating the odds that there are two completely unrelated posters with unbelievably similar names (mrsbananabethanna and bethannabanana), and they both happen to know atheist in a minivan but they aren't her sockpuppets, just her life-time-support friend in CA, and her confidant from PA.
Hey, who am i?, are you bananabethanna?
I've been following this for some time now, and offer some corrections and some questions:
Atheist in a mini van uses a logged-in profile to post with that name on GWoP in May, June, July, and August. Berlzebub just clarified that Atheist in a mini van is/was Possummomma's blogger ID, or one of them.
example 1
example 2
example 3
example 4
She refers to Bethanna and to the show, Little People: Big World - an interest shared by her JHawksgirl profile on TWoP. The JHawksgirl TWoP profile refers to living in Bakersfield and having four children. We are to understand that this was Penn Mommy entering Possummomma's ID and mimicking her interests?
Also, note that mrsbananabethanna is referred to by multiple posters (including Atheist in a mini van) as Bethanna and as bananabethanna. There is no additional poster using a name or variation on Bethanna - or at least, posters there thought they were all talking with and about the same person. Mrsbananabethanna was used as a login once:
example
Otherwise, the poster does not log in and signs bethanna
example
or mrsbethannabanana
like here.
Bethanna from Possummomma's blog said her email was bananabethanna at yahoo from search results
here.
Berlzebub refers to her on his blog as Bananabethanna, and she lists her email as bananabethanna here, too. She does not log in on this blog, and gives her name as bethanna and bethannabanana.
example
I will presume that the same person signed themselves Bethannabanana when promoting the fundraising for Possummomma on other atheist blogs.
Is someone also using Bethanna's name to try to frame her? A search reveals only one other person unrelated to the subjects of the Gosselins or Possummomma using the name Bethannabanana/bananabethanna/mrsbethannabanana/mrsbananabethanna. Does Atheist in a mini van know more than one Bethanna - one who is a Gosselin neighbor and one who is her long-time neighbor in CA?
jhawksgirl last posted on TWoP less than a year ago.
Note that you may need to be a TWoP member to see this.
I've never known the mods there to confirm a banning to anyone but the poster involved; in fact, they're notoriously uncommunicative on such issues, so if Daddy-O heard from them, I'm surprised.
If you search, you'll see that the name possummomma was only referred to once on GWoP, and was never used as anyone's sign-in name, logged in or not. Possummomma was never used as a sign-in on GDNNOP, either, logged in or not. JHawksgirl1 and Penn Mommy both show up as logins at GDNNOP.
"I think pennmommy sock puppeted real people because she could point to real people if it was questioned."
Penn Mommy never pointed to Possummomma for support or used Possummomma as backup. Do you mean that she set out to blame Possummomma from the start as a means of diverting attention from herself?
"I know pennmommy stayed in this area because prepping her son for school took most of her summer. I read a post by pennmommy who said she arranged her flight schedules for the season to be on the west coast. Her ex-husband and Jason's father lives in the larger Bakersfield area too. Pennmommy used possummomma to gain credibility of support when she blogged about the Gosselins."
I find it curious that when Atheist in a mini van is linked to posts made on GWoP all summer, suddenly this "Penn Mommy" relative was in California all summer (how much help, really, are we expected to believe that a kid needs to start college?). And this information is just dropped in the mix as if it were available before - well, it wasn't, at least not publicly. Where did you read such a post? And Penn Mommy did not ever mention the names Possummomma or Atheist in a mini van in her public blogs or comments, so how was she gaining credibility from them when blogging about the Gosselins? Not to mention, we've had contradictory information posted here, saying Penn Mommy was not based in CA all summer, but that she rigged Possummomma's computer and then worked remotely from several other locations.
Penn Mommy and Possummomma were first linked on GDNNOP, after Penn Mommy's blogging days were nearly over. She made one post on Jason's memorial blog after that, it it only refers obliquely to the situation, talking about her sons being pushed too hard and how much she's suffering.
Possummomma's side of this story has only been coming out in bits and pieces, some provided by a poster signing possummomma; others from her her friends and other supporters. Maybe someone could tell me if I have this right?
Possummomma did use the jhawksgirl ID at TWoP. She was invited to a private board about a show that interested her. She posted there for a while, then stopped.
Penn Mommy is Possummomma's relative. She really lives in PA and really has three sons, one of whom recently passed away in LA of appendicitis. Penn Mommy had some kind of relationship with the Gosselins, but may have exaggerated the details; the details she provided about her family were all true. Penn Mommy is a flight attendant. She arranged her flights to spend extensive time in CA this summer so she could help her son move. Penn Mommy asked Possummomma questions about her board memberships in search of information she could use to impersonate her. While visiting Possummomma, Penn Mommy and her son William set up Possummomma's computer so they could use several logins associated with her (including on the private board), reroute her email, and log her keystrokes remotely. They used multiple locations for this. They set up an additional account to blog as Penn Mommy. William then used one of Possummomma's pictures (or uploaded a picture of Penn Mommy's to Possummomma's Picasa account?) when William set up the Jason memorial page. Possummomma did not notice any of this until she was linked to Penn Mommy. Jason did have an obituary, but it was not online. Possummomma has done this within the family before.
I am trying to reconcile various explanations here. Possummomma said on her own blog that she hosted this picture as a favor - so why does this picture show up on Possummomma's LJ as part of a family slide show (as screencapped on GDNNOP) if she only hosted it as a favor for the memorial page? I quote from her last blog entry: "No good deed goes unpunished I suppose. I helped out someone very close to me who is grieving. I hosted a picture and now all hell has broke loose." But then we have seriously curious, here: "THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID! The only way they linked pennmommy to possummomma is when a relative uploaded a picture of Jason to possummomma's picasa web albums."
Which is it? The photo was uploaded by William for the memorial page, or it was uploaded by Possummomma as a favor, or it was just a picture she had of this young man already and she offered it as a favor, or what? If it's either of the latter two, William/Penn Mommy would not need remote access or hacker skills to upload it.
Penn Mommy and her son's motive for this is, as yet, undisclosed. Why they would need anyone else's account(s) to comment or blog about the Gosselins or their own lives is unknown. Why Possummomma would let a family member known for her online impersonation of other family members access to her computer has not been addressed. Why they and Bethanna write like Possummomma has not been addressed.
Have I covered it?
@ Everyone:
I'm a bit busy at work, and today is my wedding anniversary. So, if I can't reply to every comment and question you'll just have to give me some slack. I'll start doing IP checks and such as soon as I can.
@ Berlzebub
to tired, you wrote:
"You got me. Her blogger s/n hasn't always been possummomma. However, that wasn't the central part to my argument."
Well, it's central to the following argument:
Before Penn Mommy became a big issue, I read that blog (GWoP) and I noticed the s/c atheist in a minivan. I clicked it because I am curious and it was a "good" sceen name. It took me to Possum's blog. You have no idea how much I wish I stayed to read more than the little bit that I saw (it was about her family.) I never went back in time to read it before it closed to the public. I know that Possum posted at GWoP and I provided links to you. Here's the one that sealed her guilt for me:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6454349132986954975&postID=1078315215144083243
***When you read that little post, note the word 'skeptical.' What group values skepticism?***
Possum posted at GWoP in early June. And what she posted about is important: She explains why bananabethanna hasn't been posting for awhile. Berlzebub, Possum knows this bethanna. And this is not the "lifelong friend with the husband with cancer who must live within driving distance b/c possum brings us homemade meals" bethanna. It is the "I know people who've been in the Gossselin home and I saw a donations list at church so I am from PA" bethanna. The CA bethanna posted on your blog as a character witness for Possum. Berlzebub, how could Atheist know 2 people with that s/n. How does Possum know anyone who has been in the Gosselin home? She doesn't.
It simple: She sockpuppets!
Do you see now why that linking to her blog is central to my argument?
Do you really believe that someone remotely accessed her blog in early June? Just to post a comment on the Gosselin website? And that she also made up a sockpuppet s/n that was a variant of one of Possum's lifelong friends? And that she's a distant relative?
You are a skeptic. You admire rational thought.
So do I.
@berlzebub
Happy Anniversary to you and your beloved. Many, many more.
I am very grateful for your entertaining my curiosity.
Thanks for the new word, stylometry. Also, I am off to figure out the HTML code to link to another blog!
Curious, no more
P.S. I'll be reading.
The picture wasn't really part of a slideshow rotation as GDNNOP screen cap shows. William uploaded it and since that was the album last looked at and open, that's where the picture dropped.
The blogs don't mean shit to me as Nina Bell just proved. You can put ANY WEBSITE in the link. Watch. I'm not James Dobson, but I can make this go to focus on the family. Similarly you could put "Atheist in a Mini-Van" or "Possummomma" in the name and get it to go to her old blog. This is a flaw of the blogger system that has been used before.
It's not "simple". SOMEONE sock puppets. This isn't as simple as you want it to be. YOU are sock puppeting. You don't go by curiously on other blogs. If you can do it how do we know it can't be done by Pennmommy. You don't know if pennmommy was on GWoP before using pennmommy as a pseudonym.
Possummomma is getting screwed because she's real. Pennmommy is the pseudonym of a woman who never wanted to be known and has done this before. Not possummomma. Why would possummomma be wide open, use her own name in comments, to pretend to be any one other than herself? You keep missing that she had one of the most well read blogs in the atheist community. She didn't need to sockpuppet to share an opinion. Pennmommy did! She needed you to believe her. Look at the evidence without the bias of it having to be possummomma. Every name pennmommy sockpuppeted came from ONE BLOG ENTRY ON ONE BLOG. Berlzebub's entry on the fund raiser has every one of possummommas friends on it. In the beginning, you said Berlezebub, Calladus, Ginny, Woof/VampDivrl, Martin Wagner, Kazim, and others weren't real people. You said they were sock puppets of possummomma. Now you're kissing Calladus' ass. Like everyone else possummomma is really who she claimed she is. You haven't proven she's pennmommy.
@ intrigued:
Well done. Your recap of Possum's story is really very good. One little mistake is the line, "Possummomma has done this within the family before." It's hard to keep the 2 personas straight, but I think you meant, "Penn Mommy has done this within the family before," meaning steal family members' blogger identities, remotely access and seriously hack their computers, and install keystroke-copying software.
I'm still curious.
I wonder, since Possum reads and posts here, can Possum shed any light on where William is now? If you read his memorial blog through google reader, you'll find he can be rather upset when his mother, Penn Mommy gets challenged. He was pretty upset when people challenged whether his mom is real or not. Read his message "to the GDNNOP Readers." Yikes!
So, where's William now to defend Penn Mommy's honor from Possum's unproven, unlinked accusations against her?
Possum,
As Berlzebub and Callandus pointed out to your accusers, these are "pretty serious allegations." And, supposedly, Penn Mommy is a "real person, with a real family, with real lives." Shouldn't you be offering up some evidence that Penn Mommy (and William!) seriously hack other family members' computers, bypassed your email, betrayed your trust and hospitality while poor Jason lay dying! According to your accusation against her, Penn Mommy not only did these awful things, she continued while her son was living his last week on earth!
And another thing, did Penn Mommy hack into your life-long supportive friend bethanna's account, too? (I mean your friend bethanna from CA.) Do you share an account with bethannabanana? (I mean the one in CA) Is that how Penn Mommy was able to create a sockpuppet for herself in June with the name mrsbananabethanna (I mean the one in PA) in order to provide insider information on the Gosselin's? Is your character witness bethanna (CA) a real life-long supportive friend whom you helped while her husband had cancer? Or is she made up by Penn Mommy, too? Or did Penn Mommy hack into your friend's computer, too, find a cute screen name and, instead of creating her own sockpuppet screen name, decided to steal bethanna's screen name so she would have some "credibility"?
Possum?
I just went through this whole thread as my head was spinning from the discussions the last two days and here is my take.
The whole Bethanna/bananabethanna/mrsbananabethanna vs possummomma aka atheist in a minivan. I read all the links to posts by these people and all I see are two good friends. One lives in CA and the other in PA. I don't know this for sure but if my good friend had a husband getting cancer treatment I'd fly out there to help my friend and cook a week's worth of meals. Bethanna never said when the assistance was provided. I don't see the assumption/conclusion that Bethanna had to live in CA if Possummomma helped her out as a fact.
Regarding Possummomma/atheist in a minivan/jhawksgirl. Seems to me that these are all linked to Possummomma because she was herself as those people. Atheist in a minivan is a very well known blog and Possummomma is the known author of that blog. Jhawksgirl as Possummomma - not a sock puppet if its really you. Possummomma is hardly the first person to have different screen names for different blogs.
Somewhere along the way the request to prove allegations by furnishing IP addresses over the entire time that the Pennmommy blog was up got turned into "here's your proof Possummommy blogged on GWoP during June, etc" (October 20 1:27pm). Only 4 entries found. (October 21, 3:08pm) - all by Possummomma/atheist as a minivan posting as herself - not as a sock puppet.
An accusation was made that Berlzebub and Calladus were the ones moving the "goal post (October 21, 9:40am: "When this first started you all wanted the ip addresses, then when Possum tells the story, that point is moot. So then, you want a detailed essay about how the writing styles are similar.")
Um let’s see. IP addresses are asked for – none are provided, but lo and behold fingers are pointed to the ABC post. That was moving the goal posts. Berlzebub and Caladus did not initiate the writing sample discussion. Did Berlzebub and Caladus respond to the weaknesses in that argument, sure, they are pretty obvious. With regard to the ABC post there are no links to actual writing samples. Therefore it is heresay. For example I can say that I think that Nomoredrama is Curious because I see that they frequently type two periods at the end of a sentence or they say cannot instead of can’t, etc. Now this is all just made up on my part in 10 seconds – but without the actual writing it is just what one person is stating. Still no IP addresses to back up the claims.
As far as I can see no IP addresses have been furnished in private or public to support the claim that Pennmommy and Possummomma were posting from the same IP address from the start of the Pennmommy blog. This seems like such a simple request.
Ok
I missed the beginning of this saga and have sat back and watched.
Now admittedly I know nothing of penn mommy,or goslings or whatever it was.
I do however believe that Possummomma is doing her best to raise her children to be decent law abiding citizens. To achieve this instead of resorting to "do as I say or do as god say's" she is teaching her kids HONESTY and showing them this by example. No mean feat living where she does surrounded by the crackpots that encompass her.
Those accusers that call yourself christian Is this what your jesus told you to do ?
Those accusers that call yourself freethinkers Do you not demand proof ?
I personally am disgusted by the accusations being thrown at another human being by so called "good people" I am glad I am low life biker scum and don't live in your world.
Possummamma You have many fans and many friends out there, whatever your decision on whether you continue to blog we all know your decision will be based on what you feel is best for your children.
All the best from myself Mrs Baal and the Baalettes.
@ curious - yes, I did mean "Penn Mommy has done this before." One does wonder why such an accomplished identity thief and online imposter was allowed unfettered access to the Possummomma home computer!
@ northern cal - "...all I see are two good friends. One lives in CA and the other in PA. [...] I don't see the assumption/conclusion that Bethanna had to live in CA if Possummomma helped her out as a fact."
Except that Berlzebub has said on this blog that Bethanna is currently Possummomma's neighbor. Bethanna has stated that she is Possummomma's lifelong friend, but she has stated elsewhere that she is associated with the Gosselins. You're proposing something that would be very convoluted in real life. For all the statements about Bethanna to be true, Bethanna would have to have become Possummomma's friend years ago, then moved to PA by 2004-5 and spent time in the Gosselins' circles, then moved back to CA to become Possummomma's neighbor again by this year (except that she's still posting as if she lives in PA, talking about what the community "word" is about Jon and Kate in late July 2008), and somewhere in there Possummomma spent a week cooking food for her. You're suggesting that Possummomma - by her own account, seriously ill with lupus and practically housebound for the last couple of years - flew across the country to cook?
"Possummomma is hardly the first person to have different screen names for different blogs."
Of course she's not. This has never been at issue - I think it's fair to say that using different login names is well within netiquette, so long as those names aren't being used to masquerade as people who have no real-life counterpart at all or who the user clearly is not. The issue is that GDNNOP claims that jhawksgirl1 and Penn Mommy, both of who posted at that blog, shared the same location. This would be highly unlikely if both posters were telling the truth about themselves, because JHawksgirl1 is Possummomma's ID and she's in Bakersfield, while Penn Mommy was saying she lived in PA. GDNNOP further stated that the same location had come up under several usernames attempting comments earlier in the summer, indicating that someone was posing as multiple people from a Bakersfield location. Possummomma and others have been saying that Penn Mommy rigged Possummomma's computer during a visit and used it remotely; these are their explanations of why the locations would be the same. They have never publicly disputed the similar IPs, and indeed have offered explanations for them - even if I personally think the explanations are very far-fetched.
As for Atheist in a mini van on GWoP, you're saying that was Possummomma, not a sock. If you read some of the Possummomma supporters above, that's not what they're implying. They're implying that it's very easy to masquerade as someone else's blogger ID, and that Penn Mommy was the one leaving the comments, using Possummomma's ID information. Maybe you should all discuss this amongst yourselves so as to present a united front?
"Did Berlzebub and Caladus respond to the weaknesses in that argument, sure, they are pretty obvious. With regard to the ABC post there are no links to actual writing samples. Therefore it is heresay. For example I can say that I think that Nomoredrama is Curious because I see that they frequently type two periods at the end of a sentence or they say cannot instead of can’t, etc. Now this is all just made up on my part in 10 seconds..."
Berlzebub and Calladus have not responded to the abc post that I have seen. The post says the links can't be provided, and when I search I can see why - because the vast majority of these posts are no longer cached since the blogs have been taken down or made private. You can still read them on Google Reader, as I did today. You can check them yourself and confirm that no one is making things up or putting words in any of these identities' mouths. There's a whole list of similarities you can look for, not just one or two things. It's not "hearsay" because the statement that these writing styles are similar doesn't need to stand alone as truth. You can examine their writing, as I have, and see the similarities. It can be independently viewed.
"As far as I can see no IP addresses have been furnished... This seems like such a simple request."
Oh, trust me, if I could, I would. I don't run any of the places where these folks have been posting, so I can't. The Penn Mommy ID controlled the Penn Mommy blog, and that ID only posted as Penn Mommy once or twice anywhere else; proving that the Penn Mommy ID posted continuously from Bakersfield during the duration of her blog will thus be nearly impossible - and I think someone may be counting on that. I think the IP evidence will emerge eventually (someone won't be able to resist), and it will be countered by Possummomma with the same "She stole my identity!" statement we're getting now. What I'm hearing is "I want the IPs, or you can't prove anything. But if you have the IPs, you can't prove anything because Possummomma can explain why the IPs are the same."
...
So. If William uploaded the photo for the memorial page, why did Possummomma indicate that she hosted it as a favor? If she did the favor, wouldn't she have uploaded it to her account in a way so as to not screw up her slideshow? If William did it, why would he not make a new album (or his own album, or use any one of the number of free online hosting services) rather than upload a grainy, cropped photo of "Jason" with a young blond child to his distant relative's labeled "LJ special" album? Is he that computer illiterate? He wanted this to track back to Possummomma all along as some sort of grudge? Or what?
What the motive, anyway? Penn Mommy and son William never mentioned Possummomma's name(s) in their blog posts or indicated that they knew her in any way until they were called out. So they didn't name-drop her to gain a better reputation by associating themselves with her. Plus, if what Possummomma says is true, her interest in the Gosselin online community was minimal and she had no special "in," so why would she be some kind of big name for them?
They did not need her accounts to do any of this. They could have just set up their own blogger profiles under whatever names they wanted and blogged away happily. A comment or email to GWoP was enough to stir massive interest in their blog, because that audience was champing at the bit for negative Gosse-gossip (to the extent that one of their reps was posting on PA-area forums asking for insiders to come forward). If they'd used accounts of their own, no one would have any idea who they were in real life and they could just vanish. What on earth is their motive for using Possummomma? And as a mother-son computer crimes team to boot!
BTW, in the Bethanna link above - I noticed just a few things. "And," and "But," used to start sentences. Trouble with possessives (Roloff's, Parent's). Capitals for emphasis. Adding hyphens when none are needed (sell-out).
Now, so that I can provide a direct link, here's Scarlett75 (AKA Possummomma), posting at a stamping forum where she was an active member. She repeatedly starts sentences with "But," spells Duggars' as Duggar's, and uses capitals as emphasis. Gee, in one post she repeated 3 out of 4 of Bethanna's grammatical "tics." Plus, they both use backslashes in place of "or." And they both use ellipses. And they both love talking about the morality of large families on the learning channel...
Frankly, if I could access a freeware stylometry program on my Mac, I would (please, if you know of one, tell me!), because I have a feeling that if you compared the known body of Possummomma's writing under her various names with the (much smaller) known work of William, Bethanna in all her guises, and Penn Mommy, you'd have some strong statistical matches. You listed two things, only one of which is unusual or a mistake, in your counter. What are the chances of finding 25 identical, unusual "tics" - not typos where two letters are switched, but identical misspellings and formatting choices - in the writings of two different people? 50? Because if you look at Possummomma's work and compare it to the others' blogs, you'll start finding that they make the same errors at the level. And these are literate people, not people who make mistakes every other word.
It would be a whole lot easier to go over this if Possummomma would supply a more coherent explanation. Her side of this comes out in drips and drabs that she tells to friends, some of whom then tout them as known facts, like, "Duh! How could you not know that Penn Mommy was impersonating her all summer by diverting her email from her private account? It's all very rational!" Why not tell the whole story in one place, instead of saying you don't want to reveal your relative's information - but then proceed to reveal selected pieces of it to friends who then post competing explanations in your defense, shifting the facts slightly to counter charges as they come and confusing things all the more? I'm not asking for full names or social security numbers here; I'm saying that were I maintaining my innocence, a good jumping-off point for getting things all clarified would be one coherent explanation addressing all the various coincidences and the timeline of events, rather oblique words and friends speaking for you. What's really going on?
Ultimately, Possummomma doesn't have to explain anything to anyone. People can look at what's out there and make up their own minds about whether to trust her. But I don't think GDNNOP's reasoning was either bizarre or unfounded (and I don't believe they ever publicly posted phone numbers or real-life contact details, as I know some accusers have done here - I agree that that's ridiculous).
When you get multiple posts from the same location under different names (and I truly think they did); when all of them use similar writing styles; when one of them is found to have posted a picture using someone else's account and THAT person just happens to live in the same location, be interested in the same topics, and blog about recent similar experiences; when one of them claims that she's suddenly caring for her child in the ICU; when another pops up to keep everyone online updated on the condition of his grievously ill brother, and seems to care more about ragging on a tv family and throwing accusations at posters he has never met than his actual dying brother; when no records can be found of these brothers despite their names, schools, and approximate locations being provider (by the poster himself, mind you); when the one accused makes a case for the convoluted theft of her identity by the others, who really do exist, really, but she won't say any more, except when she will - it is not irrational to think that someone might be trying to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge. In fact, it's a significant departure from rationality to have your first thought be that her distant relative set her up for a fall by impersonating her online. So why have people coming to that conclusion been labeled as idiots, fundamentalist trolls, and "mean girls"?
I will be very surprised if any of this is fully resolved, because I believe Possummomma is being truthy instead of truthful. At this point, she'd have a whole lot more to explain than she would have two weeks ago.
I admit that I don't fully understand why I'm so intrigued by this. Maybe because I have other things to do and it's a means of procrastination. I like a good puzzle, though.
For those of you who keep posting like this and thinking that this somehow proves how easily Possum/Atheist in a Minivan's account could be used to post...
Note the clear differences. I am not logged in on a blogger name. Therefore, the blogger logo is not to the left of my s/n.
Note also that any picture that I would have posted with (please note the picture posted with Possum's s/n) does not appear.
Atheist in a Minivan was a logged in s/n.
Furthermore, I doubt you'll be provided with the actual IP address. Why? Because it doesn't matter first of all. Possum already claimed the person was staying with her...hence, the IP is not in question.
Secondly...will you REALLY verify that the IP belongs to Possum? I highly doubt it.
There is more than enough proof without you knowing the specific IP. It has been the same IP over time.
For a logical group, you seem to always take the most complicated explanation. Now, Bethanna does live in PA but flew out to California. Do you also believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny? Because I've heard some pretty creative explanations on how they do what they do.
There is a difference between what is possible and what is likely. I can say this...everything you describe is highly unlikely.
Um let’s see. IP addresses are asked for – none are provided, but lo and behold fingers are pointed to the ABC post.
I don't understand why the ip addresses where in question in the first place. This is the first paragraph of "P-blog Drama", which I think is where this started:
P-Momma has been linked to some comments made on another blog, because a distant relative stayed with P-Momma for a while. The relative used P-Momma's internet connection, and made some comments on that blog.
From the beginning, possum says that pennmommy is staying with her, so the ips aren't a question there. If this is in regard to the other proposed socks, I don't see how that matters either. Whether or not there were other socks seems pointless now as the connection between Penn and Possum have already been made.
And the fingers are pointing at the ABC board because of this:
Re: the writing styles
Perhaps you should research stylometry. Further, the person who makes the claim needs to point out the similarities, individually. Not just say, "the two styles are the same".
That is exactly what the person on the ABC board did.
And for the record, I'm not kissing anyone's ass. Gdnnop is not my blog, but I like the people there and I think they are getting someone elses just desserts. I can understand why Berlzebub and Calladus would want to defend a friend. They are allowing me to come here and speak my peice, and I appreciate it, and I won't be disrespectful to Them. I guess I could just say that they are just a couple of assholes who are talking shit about my friends, but that's not the way I feel. They didn't cause this, just as gdnnop didn't cause this. Take it however you want to, but I truly don't give a damn what you think my motives are.
I've been lurking/reading since the PM thing happened.
I have to commend you guys for standing up for a friend.
I am not from 'that other blog' although I have posted there, usually in the capacity of defending myself or friends.
The evidence on both sides of this issue is out there for people to read and then make up their own minds.
I'm sorry-but I would never think to go to someone else's home for the sole purpose of convincing them that 'my way was the only way'.
I don't know why 'they' have felt the need to come to your blog and 'badger'. 'They' presented their evidence and theories on their blog. People are free to go there and read it as well as come here and read yours.
And free as well to make up their own minds. I can't imagine you or your followers thinking that someone with dissenting views needs to be 'straightened out'.
I understand it can be hurtful when people say things about you or people you know. A normal reaction would be to jump in and defend.
But many of us have found that the longer you engage these people, the better they like it.
(Crap, I started that sentence with But. But I didn't use a comma. I don't know which is safest at this point).
Anywho-you all will do what you feel you have to with this. I just wanted to throw in my two cents in regards to pehaps a way for you to get back to your normal daily blog routines.
"In the beginning, you said Berlezebub, Calladus, Ginny, Woof/VampDivrl, Martin Wagner, Kazim, and others weren't real people. You said they were sock puppets of possummomma."
Curious didn't say this. I haven't said this and I don't believe it, either. I would appreciate a link if you have it, because I think someone is inferring from claims that some of Possummomma's defenders are socks to specific names are socks to make all the claims look spurious. I know Martin Wagner exists as a real person, and I don't think anyone suggested he doesn't. What was suggested on GDNNOP was that the story of Martin Wagner's cease-and-desist letter may have been the inspiration for Penn Mommy's claims of receiving such a letter.
I think there are some socks around; it's hard not to doubt when an ID with no other online activity comes out of the woodwork when Possummomma is mentioned AND says things that verifiable people have not ("I met Penn Mommy," for example - even if you were told that someone you met was Penn Mommy, how would you know that was true unless she sat you down and regaled you with stories of her blogging?).
Good eye, your mom. I never noticed that before. Atheist in a mini van was logged in when she commented, so someone would have to have her sign-in information to use her ID. Is this where the keystroke logger and the email diversion come in? Although I don't see how Possummomma could not notice that someone else was using an account that she used all the time.
Looony's wife
It appeared to me, that Berlzebub actually invited people here to discuss this. You say badger. It appears to me he has opened this up for discussion. If he wanted it to end he could end it. So are you now coming into his house and telling him what to do?
Is your hate for another blog or a reality tv series so great that you need to surf around the internet and leave your so called words of wisdom with the intent of only making others look bad?
@ Everyone:
I'm going to be out of town, starting in about an hour. So, any comments made will be held up in moderation until my return.
Just thought you should know.
Would you please provide the references where Berlzebub states that Bethanna lives in California? I searched this blog entry and didn't find it. I provided references in my post - your turn. If she currently lives in CA then I'm willing to stand corrected on domicile. But, (note that when a sentence begins with a conjunction a comma is used) I can think of many different reasonable, simple explanations to explain Possummomma knowing Bethanna and Bethanna knowing the Gosselins. The conclusion that Possummomma is also sockpuppeting Bethanna is not in irrefutable conclusion. You need better proof.
I don't know Berlzebub or Caladus. I just find how Possummomma is being accused obnoxious. I think the plastering of her children, and the plastering of names and numbers all over the internet obnoxious. I think that sock puppeting other posters to help make your point obnoxious. (http://blog.psychic-wisdom.net/2008/10/06/applause-for-truth-breeds-hatred-legatus-non-violatur/ see from post #15 on down). I find the strawman arguments disingenuous and obnoxious. I find exaggeration and taking things out of context obnoxious, i.e. no one ever said that Pennmommy was staying on the west coast - they said that she arranged her flight schedule to be on the West Coast (October 20 11:23pm). Hence the strawman argument: Do you really think that it is reasonable that someone spends their entire summer helping someone move in? (I'm paraphasing - see Oct 21 3:14pm) The answer of course is no.
Wow lurkingmyself!!
Spelling not one of your fortes?
I believe 'badger' was used and I should have specified.
Bbub seems to have asked, as have others, for IP addresses. More than once.
For people to return again and again without addressing what seems to be a valid question, that I would indeed classify as badgering.
I don't believe I "told' him what to do. How did you arrive at that from my comment? I offered a suggestion as to how attempt to get certain commenters to give it up, if they were in fact, becoming annoying.
How is my leaving a comment on a blog I came across because I saw it posted on Gosselin's Do Not Need Our Pity, 'surfing the internet'?
Did I say I hated 'another blog' or a reality tv series anywhere in that comment? I don't believe I mentioned television at all.
Did I make someone 'look' bad? Was that you?
Perhaps reading my comment again might be helpful before submitting your own comment.
And yet, somehow I think your point was to show up, spew and depart.
C'est la vie~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Funny how the Bethanna in CA character's husband had cancer. Did you guys know that the Bethanna in PA character, who posted on GWOP often, claimed to have cancer herself?
@Lonneyswife:
I am not a blog owner. You and I share some of the same conclusions about the Gosselins. We do not share the same line of thinking to get there, and we certainly do not share our style of expessing it. By that, I mean, I try to be prudent online as well as off. Look before you leap, please.
@ everyone else:
I believed Penn Mommy was real and came here wondering what Possum's defense was. There was no defense. What I read was: the 'Burden of Proof' falls on the accusers!
I sound as if I am discounting the character witnesses here, but I really am not. The character witnesses are the only real defense Possum seems to have. I'd be tempted to mock her if she didn't have such good friends, and therefore must be a better person than I've seen. She has at least one blogger, Calludas, who seems completely verifiable, and another, Berlzebub, who may still be anonymous to me, but seems completely consistent to the character he has portrayed through his writing. For example: I was not dismissed when I declared recently that I was curious, no more, and decided that Penn Mommy is a sockpuppet of Possum. She also has a biker guy, who seems like the real deal, as well as other bloggers from the skeptics/atheist world who have chimed in with character references. And then there are daddy o, who am i?, bri or am i? and seriously curious, who are friends with Possum, who post previously unseen pointlets of information, some of it out of context, and who all write in a similar, desparate style. Or perhaps they are her sockpuppets.
Since I came, posters who seem to have spoken to Possum, and Possum herself, have trickled aspects of her story onto this thread, as intrigued pointed out above. There were fishy things before, but after reading this thread, and knowing as much as I do about the Gosselin Blog drama, I can't help deciding that the "Scooby-Doo-ers" at GDNNOP got it right. Possum's side of the story really does appear preposterous. I would happily change my mind if she would give that coherent and believable story as asked above by intrigued. I am not asking for personal details. Or IP's.
Northern California requested the reference where Berlzebub said Bethanna lived in California. I never read a statement in so many words from Berlzebub - I believe it was an assumption since Bethanna indicated during her character reference for Possummomma that they were old friends and Possummomma had cooked a week's worth of food for Bethanna. I did, however, find the following post on Berlzebub's blog from someone posting as Bethanna's significant other and when you read the last line it is pretty clear that he is stating he lives in "Bako" which I assume is Bakersfield,CA.
Here is the statement copy/pasted:
Bananabethanna's Sig Other said...
Berlie, it's tough on blogger. If you don't have anything installed now you may want to install a map tracker. Some will give you a list of who's been hitting your page with a time stamp. It's not largely accurate since this site doesn't support IP collecting. The most you'll get is a geographic location or server location. There's also people who can grab your IP and use it as their own as is the case with WiFi. Places like here in Bako have places where everyone's on the same wireless connection.
February 22, 2008 7:20 AM
@Joanne:
Thanks for the cut/paste about "Bako" wireless connection sharing. Since I don't believe there is a bethanna, nor a significant other, I will assume that this is why Possum's IP's didn't match bethanna's when bethanna emailed Berlie at this blog.
Berlzebob writes that Bethanna is Possummomma's neighbor here. I quote: "As far as the others, they'll have to do better than "they all live in Bakersfield". Bethanna is a neighbor, and I found a post (which I won't link to since it included names) where David talks about actually knowing P-Momma outside of cyberspace." I can see it now: "He doesn't say whose neighbor, just a neighbor." I think it's safe to say he didn't mean Bethanna was his own neighbor. I'll make the guess that the information came from either Bethanna or Possummomma, since Berlzebub himself is living in a different state.
I'm going to be a grammar nitpicker for a moment, northern cal. It is generally incorrect to start a sentence with a conjunction, though occasionally accepted for reasons of style or emphasis. No comma should be used after this conjunction. The only time a comma is used after a conjunction beginning a sentence is to set off a dependent clause (or if the conjunction is an adverbial conjunction, such as "however" or "therefore").
In any case, while using "But," to start a sentence is unusual, it's only one of a large number of writing tics that Possummomma shares with Bethanna, BK, Penn Mommy, and William. Lots of people individually will do things like misspell "judgment" or use a comma in the wrong place. It's when two writers claim to be different people but make many identical writing choices and mistakes that it's worth investigation. You're not willing to look at their writing, and that's your choice.
I'll add that Penn Mommy being on the west coast was part of "who am I"'s post. "I know pennmommy stayed in this area because prepping her son for school took most of her summer. I read a post by pennmommy who said she arranged her flight schedules for the season to be on the west coast." Quibbling over the flight schedule issue is just that: quibbling. He provided the information as a pendant to the assertion that it took her most of the summer to settle her son at college. His college was named as USC, which is on the west coast. She arranged her flights to be there for the task that took most of the summer. If the poster makes the claim that it took most of the summer to settle her son at school, asking whether that's a reasonable assertion is not a straw man or an exaggeration. You aren't helping your cause when you repeatedly insinuate incorrect things.
@curious: I've noticed a few odd ducks like that around too. For example, who are Gosixgoss and LOLO, who posted on stargazer's blog? Stargazer got the post via Calladus, and these people commented on it. Gosixgoss says she knows Penn Mommy, that Penn Mommy had previously impersonated a relative over a church rumor in 2005, and that the whole thing is a frame job by the unlikely couple of Fiona and Guinevere. How does she know any of this? LOLO claims she is "LOLO from the comments at GDNNOP" (I don't see a LOLO there who commented on this situation) and is really angry at GDNNOP and at Julie, who "fucked" Penn Mommy by abandoning her. She claims to have Penn Mommy's email to the GDNNOP mods, because one of the mods sent it to her (what email? Why would a mod send it to her?). She "used to be on their [GDNNOP's] side and got kicked out of the clique." What is she talking about? She exaggerates given circumstances ("a full ten days" between appendectomies - the 17th to the 24th is not ten days). She also has trouble spelling hearsay. Now, that's not enough for me to conclude anything about who it is, but it's all odd. I think someone (or maybe more than one?) is trying to obfuscate. It's not only using an otherwise-unknown ID, it's that they pop up and drop information they can't know without inside help. There are anonymous posters out there, too, who are trying to make this a big conspiracy between GWoP and Bohemian Moon; I don't know if people are getting really carried away or if it's just meant to confuse things further, but I have yet to see anything that would lead me to believe those claims.
Berlzebub (or Calladus, if you're reading), check out the profile "Peppermintpatty" at Television Without Pity. I think jhawksgirl must have been banned in December 2007 (not two years ago) and made up a new profile to continue posting. Look at the dates, the writing, the fact that she refers to jhawksgirl familiarly despite having relatively few posts, the interests she shares with jhawksgirl, and her linking to Possummomma's blog. People get banned at TWoP all the time and come back as new names; I think that what makes this more unusual is that she doesn't just change names, but is pretending not to be herself - she refers to her "real" self in third person and plugs her own blog as if it isn't hers. It's an example of her sockpuppeting.
@intrigued
Have you noticed how northern cal spells "hearsay" on this thread? She gets it wrong, too. You know what else she gets wrong? "I think the plastering of her children, and the plastering of names and numbers all over the internet obnoxious." Intrigued, I can tell you been all over the blog world finding Possum in all her various screen names and puppets. You have obviously read as much as or more than anyone here (except Possum) on the topic. Have you seen Possum's children plastered all over the blog world? Have you ever seen anyone publish names or numbers? I have read a lot, though not every one of these blogs and forums. I have seen Berlzebub here mention emails he received, or maybe even posts (that are being moderated.) On what blog was this stuff actually posted and revealed? Or maybe northern cal can fill us in? Or maybe northern cal doesn't know either because it's just "heresay"?
@sistah2:
I didn't know that the Gosselin Bethanna claimed to have cancer too. So Northern Cal's theory about there being one Bethanna in PA and her good lifelong friend Possum in CA who flies to PA and cooks for six weeks for her looks even less plausible. Not only did Possum fly to PA for 6 weeks(did Possummomma bring her children along for this extended stay?), but Bethanna has a significant other in 'Bako' who is a 'husband with cancer', just like Bethanna?
I am looking forward to the explanation, which should not take days and days like it has. Where are the responses to this from the atheist/skeptics world? Why would Possum possibly be silent about this? How can explaining this compromise anyone's privacy? We don't need full names, just use the screen names Bethanna PA and Bethanna CA or whatever to reconcile all these different accounts. Forget anything else about Penn Mommy and someone (real please) give the coherent explanation.
I think I know it, and it's two words long.
She exaggerates given circumstances ("a full ten days" between appendectomies - the 17th to the 24th is not ten days).
Another example of people making accusations as support when the facts are wrong. Jason had his first surgery on the 14th.
"She exaggerates given circumstances ("a full ten days" between appendectomies - the 17th to the 24th is not ten days).
Another example of people making accusations as support when the facts are wrong. Jason had his first surgery on the 14th."
factsrus, I was going by the date when Penn Mommy posted about her son's surgery - the 17th. This is what she wrote about it (via pennmommyfortruth.blogspot.com, accessed via Google Reader):
"My son is in the ICU right now (in California no less) and I'm sitting here looking at the comments I haven't published. Something just doesn't sit right. Fiona, if you can e-mail me, then I'd really appreciate it. I think someone may have been posting using your name. I don't know why any sane person would create a blog account to do that, but one of the unpublished (but not yet banished comments totally contradicts something you said in another post). If I was misled and deleted you unfairly, then I owe you an apology as well.
I know some of you read the intro to that last paragraph and will ask about my son. Don't worry. He will be just fine. He is a student at USC (Freshman). He had been having a bad stomach ache for several days. But, because of the MetroLink accident, the hospitals and emergency rooms were telling everyone to stay home and only come in for real emergencies. My son, who got into USC with a nice academic scholarship, mind you...didn't realize his appendix had ruptured. Not his most intelligent moment. He walked around for twelve hours (we think) after it burst- the pain suddenly went away and he felt okay...until the 104 fever popped up. He'll be in here for a while because of the infection in his blood stream. They're letting me visit him in the ICU, but they're so busy with people from the accident that they're limiting visiting hours. So...here I sit. Bored, but grateful for his life. He got so lucky."
As you can see, the indication is that this is the first time she has posted about it, or she would not need to explain what had happened. She posted lengthy entries on the 13th and 15th with no mention of her son's problems. Were there any other places where she discussed her son's surgery being on the 14th? Do you know something we don't? And how would LOLO have known it, since she's just "from the GDNNOP comments section"?
curious, I have not seen pictures of children or names of children plastered anywhere, unless the photo of "Jason" is one of Possum's children. I think that anyone who looks can find such things, because Possummomma has put them out there, but I haven't seen anyone circulating such images or information in regards to this situation, no. The only place I've seen names or phone numbers mentioned is in Berlzebub's posts about receiving and redacting anonymous comments, where he responds to an anon who sent him names and numbers. They were never posted on GDNNOP that I know of, nor anywhere else.
A correction: Bethanna cooked for a week, not six weeks. But I've lost sight of which Bethanna it was supposed to be - CA Bethanna, the neighbor with the husband with cancer, or PA Bethanna who knows the Gosselins and had cancer, or are they the same?
My head is swimming. At this point I don't know which end is up on the pennmommy thing. One question I do have is why has no one gone to get a copy of Jason's death certificate? Is it not public record and would put some of these questions to rest?
I want to clarify something that I've seen tossed around that GDNNOP first encountered pennmommy as a sockpuppet when she posted as the neighbor Etown mom, but was posting from Bakersfield. Sorry folks but you were lied to about that one. I'm the real Etwon mom and I have never posted from Bakersfield and I am not a sockpuppet of anyone. If that's where they say the story starts, they are either incapable of reading sitemeter or outright misleading folks. It's also very easy (via the magic of NetMeeting) to post from one place with an IP from a different state as I'm doing tonight to prove it.
I have to tend to discount GDNNOP's arguments as they hounded me to "prove" who I was and laughed at what I told them about Kate. They then cackled with glee that I wasn't posting from Pennsylvania and that proved that I was lying.
They also did not let through the simple explanation that I was at my mother's. Based on my experience with them, they have trouble telling the truth themselves and do not identify themselves with real names, but have no problem demanding a lot of proof from other people. They harrass and stalk people who disagree with them and twist the words of other posters and makeup stories when they can't get their way using actual facts.
All that said, there still is doubt in my mind about pennmommy and I would like to see some evidence besides the one picture that Jason actually existed.
Hello Etwon mom,
You described GDNNOP this way: "They harrass and stalk people who disagree with them and twist the words of other posters and makeup stories when they can't get their way using actual facts."
What specifically do you mean by harass and stalk? What exactly are you talking about? Can you give a specific example of harassment? Can you give an example of stalking? Thanks!
Curious,
GDNNOP claims they spent "hours" looking through eight years of my mom's internet history. You made posts about her miscarriages (very cruel)and spoke without confirming her disease was and is as real as it gets. You took it way out of line when you and your groupies decided to say she had Munchausen's because we her children have had health problems. Corinne deserved what she got by involving herself with you. Did any of you write mom before you publicly flagged her? No you didn't. People from your blog came to my blog to tell me my mom was scamming them for putting my sisters wish list on line after surgery. The window film made her able to help us more which you care nothing about. I had a nephrectomy in 1999. If my mom didn't advocate for me I would be dead. She didn't blog about me during my illness because we didn't have a computer so your people lied by saying she used my illness to get sympathy. She talked about it afterward with gratefulness for my life but you don't care about that either. I read that site on GDNNOP and I notice that you attack anyone who talks about Jon and Kates kids. Didn't stop you did it and my mom didn't put us on television. That makes you a stalker. I may be thirteen but I know a hypocrite when I see one. You are not a stalker but you guys are waiting for death certificates from my mom which is mega lame? You're not peeking in our windows maybe but the rest of the behavior is the same as a stalker. To your friends I want to say I loved getting comments telling me my brother and I were in danger and we should "run for help". Great advice to give teen age kids. I'm being sarcastic.
Etownmom my mom didn't claim to be you. That was a suggestion by people made because you said close to the same thing about the Gosselins as Corinne.
This is appalling. Either someone is impersonating a child, or a child has been rallied to jump in on behalf of mom. Dragging a child into the middle of this to speak for you is a reprehensible attempt to duck the argument by tarring your opposition. Why would you ever think this would be appropriate?
Now that's CURIOUS....a mother allows her 13 year-old to follow the blog drama. The same drama that is causing pounds and pounds of weight loss, disturbed sleep and overall heartbreak.
Give it up! One thing she has not learned through all of this is how to copy a writing style that would match the developmental stage that the author was in (11, 13, 20). She has no idea what "lingo" kids are using these days. Her attempt to sound like a 13 year-old online is pathetic.
At this point, PM has not answered any of the accusations in a meaningful (or believable) way. She is merely trying to keep the game going. This woman is clearly not playing with a full deck. Therefore, she will never admit the truth. I hope she gets some help soon.
@Berlzebub,
Are you still out of town? Is someone else moderating comments? To whomever is moderating the comments on this blog: I think it is unwise to let this thirteen year-old's comments through, regarding her mother. Clearly this is an emotional discussion for her, and her presence here may stifle the friendly back and forth the adults have enjoyed over the weeks. I do not wish to respond to a child about why I think her mother is an elaborate Internet liar. I have no desire to hurt her feelings. But I am surely not changing my position because of her emotional response. That wouldn't be very rational.
@P1's parents,
If you do read this, please reconsider allowing your daughter to "fight your battles" for you. As a mother myself, I know that children can sneak around and break rules, so I would not be surprised if you did not know this response was posted. I will forgive her silly accusations of stalking against me. As I have stated before on this thread, I am not a blog owner. That means I am not a moderator at GDNNOP. I do not understand IP numbers. I do not even support the Gosselin parents. I came here looking for the defense against Possumomma from someone who is not only a friend, but who claims to use rational thought and evidence, rather than emotion, in making his judgments. I have been disappointed.
@Etown mom,
My question stands. You are not P1. You claim to have been "stalked and harassed" by GDNNOP. Unless you are the same person as P1, you cannot claim to have been harassed about comments made to her blog or about her mother.
Oooops! I did not mean to type "defense against Possummomma," but "defense on behalf of Possummomma from her friends." Sorry about that!
@ P1:
Thanks for commenting. Judging by the comments following yours, it seems that some forget that your mother is a real person.
Also, have her give me a call sometime this week, if she's up to it. I'm up until 10 EST on weekdays.
@ Intrigued:
Ummm.. you left out several other options. One of which is that perhaps P1 is tired of all of you making her mother out to be something she's not. P1 and P2 recently received some emails and comments telling them that their mother was a danger to their lives.
Also, if you'd actually read P-Momma's blog before this fiasco, you would have seen that P1 is more than willing and capable of defending her mother. She also happens to be thirteen, and capable of making her own decisions in this respect.
So, it seems that you're attempts to catagorize P-Momma's actions as reprehensible is blatantly ignorant. Who knows P-Momma better, do you think? You or the one who has known her for thirteen years and counting.
@ Seriously:
You're an ass. Take five thirteen year olds and you would probably get five different writing styles. Also, the hasty generalization about "lingo" is a non-sequitur. The same as all of the assertions that since you can't find someone's information on Google then that person must not exisit.
@ Curious:
When you first showed up, I thought you might be willing to listen. However, your comment to me has shown you to be as worthless as the rest.
To me, a "friendly back and forth" does not involve someone being accused of Munchausens, fraud, lieing, and mental instability (just to name a few).
As far as my presence, I've been doing other things. I periodically check my comments, and if they aren't anonymous or give personal information they get published.
@ Everyone:
P1 has just as much of a right to see the accusations leveled against her mother as anyone else. Actually, she probably has more of a right than anyone else who's commented or even posted here. That you have accused P-Momma of sock-puppeting (I'm seeing a pattern by the way), or forcing her daughter to get involved has shown me how pointless it is to debate with you.
That you can't believe someone's adolescent daughter would not come to her mother's defense, on her own, makes me wonder what the hell is wrong with you. Perhaps, in the midst of your character attacks and smears, you forgot that the person you are accusing isn't just a bunch of electrons on a screen. She's a wife, mother, friend, and much more that you haven't bothered to get to know before making your charges.
So, if you can't handle having what you are saying being read by her daughter, then I would suggest you STFU. I'm through debating with you. Perhaps, one day, we'll get the evidence to prove that P-Momma is innocent of your accusations. Considering the shotgun tactics that everyone has used to smear her name it won't be easy. However, in the mean time, I've gotten to the point that I don't give a rats ass what you think.
Now, I'm going to get back to my Sunday chores, and playing with my daughter. I actually have a life outside of this, and it doesn't involve trying to figure out what's wrong with everyone else.
Oh, forget it. This "rational thinking" community owes a response to the people who have posted here. Instead, legitimate evidence and arguments have been met by silence and/or lunacy. This thread began with an impassioned "rant" against unsupported accusations with unsupported accusations against another group of blog moderators. From the start, Berlzebub, you admitted that you "had trouble figuring out what was going on." You demonstrated that right here in your "rant" by confusing the sources of information you received against PM. There are at least TWO opposing Gosselin blogs, and which is which matters.
Here's something else from your "rant:"
After that, they go silent. I find it really fuckin' ironic that I asked for them to let me see the message board for myself, but they've never responded. Berlze, you are the KING of never responding. Your response to my questions and those of intrigued is silence. Silence. And more silence. I am more than willing to listen, but all I get is silence.
You asked for links and stylometric evaluation, and you got both. Your response: Silence.
As for the "friendly back and forth," I have accused Possummomma of being a liar and a sockpuppet. I have not denied that she was ill, a mother, a human being, nor have I accused her of fraud, mental illness, or Maunchausens, or whatever other accusations you had in mind for me. I stand by my refusal to engage with a teenager over whether her mother is a liar or not. I think you are unwise to let her comment here. Unwise. Is that too stinging a charge for you? Is that the part of what I wrote that has you accusing me of being worthless? Be a man.
Here's some advice from this thread from another "rational thinker" named Terra.
Also-issue a full redaction and apology for attacking P-Momma, already. It's the responsible, adult thing to do. Isn't it time you all started acting like the responsible adults you are?
Well, where's the apology for attacking the moderators at GDNNOP?
Does the Truth even matter to you?
I got what I came for: an answer to whether Penn Mommy was a sockpuppet of that fabulous atheist writer and supermom/defender of children, Possummomma. I'm leaving with more, though: the knowledge that this atheist community would 'sell its soul' rather than admit they've been had. Instead of the post saying, "We were wrong, and this whole episode shows why one should follow the evidence and his head, rather than his heart and what he wishes were true," we get their "big guns" hiding behind sockpuppet children. Shameful!
You disgrace those of us who try to make the world better through rational discourse and a scientific, reasoned, approach to knowing what is the Truth.
By the way, watch your mouth when there are ladies present.
I have said plenty on this issue, Curious. I've been blogging in a selectively read blog since the first day. This experience still confuses me. The problem with talking about it in public is that someone runs to another website to pick it apart. You haven't accepted my evidence or defense to this point because you don't want to hear it. Ripping it apart is the goal. There have been hundreds who know me personally that don't get a voice. A person who defends me is labeled a fake. I won't ask what you'd do because I have seen what you do. I find it inexcusable. It's been a month since you sported your first hate-hard-on. Aren't you getting blue balls yet? Spin it away if you want but you can't spin away that you've all done the things you claim to hate about other people in your blog. Having a community who we mutually give and receive is a bad thing (acc. to a few of you). Taking your six children on a television show and soliciting millions in cash and prizes without giving back is fine.
P1 is 13. She's not four. As far as I'm concerned, you or people like you sought her out to tell her she was being harmed. This was her response. You don't think our whole family has suffered? They lost someone who wasn't very old that they knew. That's a mortality check. We found out that a relative they knew used all of us. It hurts every person in our home. She isn't standing up for me ---she is standing up for her family! Her family! I didn't drag her in to this. If you knew us you'd know she posted to my blog occasionally. You don't get that you can't screw with one person in a family without having it touch everyone else. Your band of brothers pulled her in by contacting her. Not the other way around. Get a life. Berlie and I aren't here to serve you.
If minors are being e-mailed with a message warning them about their mother isn't this illegal?
I know that there are people that believe that pennmommy is Possum's sock puppet, but contacting her children? Whoever is doing that really needs to get a hold of him/herself, settle down and get some perspective. Completely out of line even if the accusations were true.
Berlzebub, that you would support a thirteen-year-old taking part in this argument only tells me that you'll hit below the belt when it suits you. I am left with the impression that you were only pretending to invite discussion so long as you felt you had the advantage, but very much resent losing it. You present thirteen like an age of majority, but I absolutely cannot accept that involving a thirteen-year-old directly in an adult argument is appropriate regardless of her supposed maturity, or that I am "blatantly ignorant" for finding it objectionable. Regardless of whether her daughter wants to defend her or not, a parent should not allow her to leap into the line of fire. Mom can speak for herself if only she will - she has certainly proved able in the past, and she has plenty of forums available. PMomma has been very critical of people exploiting children and not respecting their privacy, and I do not see how having her child jump into this argument is consistent with that position. The only thing it's consistent with is a desire to play the victim card and shut down discussion. It's unbecoming, but it has worked with me; I will not even put up the facade of fighting with a "child."
What I've seen from PMomma's friends is the same human impulse to support a friend even in the face of reason that any other group would have. I can't fault that. I can say that I've seen no particular claim to logic from a group that routinely denigrates their opponents' lack of same. I've seen arguments that stretch all probability, that appeal to emotion, that demonize opponents by labeling them Christians and then tar all Christians with the same brush, that offer false equivalency, that duck and dodge and jab with random countercharges and offer bits of misinformation; that deliberately mislead and address issues only selectively. I have reached a level of exasperation at which I no longer trust myself to speak civilly. It seems you feel the same frustrations - can we agree on that?
I think we're simply at an impasse and are not going to get beyond "No I didn't! You did! I didn't, you did! You're bad! You're worse!" territory. The different sides here have no reason to trust each other. We have no impartial judges to help us out. I think stylometry would be well applied here, but have done as much as I can by hand and it hasn't been addressed. Clearly, I won't change your mind, and neither you nor the other participants here have presented anything that would cause me to change mine. I think that GDNNOP's claim has been more than adequately supported; you don't. Hopefully, the online community around this TV show has learned to take "insiders" with a grain of salt, and I think that's about all the good I see coming from this. I hope that this situation isn't repeated in some other community, but I for one will not be pursuing it anywhere new.
The only thing I've had at stake here (beyond a fundamental sense that it's not OK to manipulate people through false pretenses) is my desire to be right about an unraveling mystery. I think you have a friendship and a reputation on the line, and I can empathize with your desire to keep both intact even if I do not agree with your reasoning or your methods. Funnily enough, outside of this situation, I think we would find ourselves on the same side of a number of issues (I oppose creationism and so-called "Intelligent Design" in schools; I fervently support separation of church and state and don't understand why religious doctrine is allowed to affect so much of our legislation and educational system; I just cast an early ballot for Obama). But there is no reason for me to continue with this issue here; you opened the post for comments, I've presented my opinion, and you aren't hearing it. I'm going to wish you the best on the matters in which we do agree, apologize for my long-windedness, and stop gnawing this bone on your blog.
P1 was not dragged in to deal with this. This last month has been difficult for her. She was faced with the mortality of a boy not much older than she. Her younger sister had surgery. We were then treated to the hell of a family torn apart because of the dishonesty of two people. Our younger children don't know and dont' care about any of this. Berlie's blog is a place where P1 has read and participated in for more than a year. Why should she stop being an active member of a community she enjoys because adults can't behave themselves? I feel she's been patient and mature. You can only push a person so far and she has more right to respond to this than any of you. I didn't encourage her to post. I have encouraged her to ignore this. Ideally, she wouldn't have known about this drama. Confront the people who took it upon themselves to e-mail she and her brother.
I have responded to this. I was not given the chance to defend myself. Not seeing my response or action shouldn't be considered non-action. I felt obligated to protect Corinne's family until they could answer these accusations with a clear mind. They are not there yet. You will get information and confirmation as it is appropriate. The family wanted to first do right by family. We also knew that what we were going through was not comparable to the pain of losing a child. This drama was upsetting. We had to do investigations of our own to determine the magnitude of what happened. We are still confused by some of what we've been told.
I'm not saying anything about Corinne. It's not the right time.
Possummomma,
I did not email P1. Your daughter has accused me of actions we agree would be reprehensible, and you have let her do so. It's a scurrilous accusation, unsupported by any evidence, and you approved it. That's bad parenting.
If P1 wants to respond to the people who emailed her, perhaps she should hit the reply button on the emails and start typing up her response. Then she would not be so prone to the same thing you accuse the moderators of GDNNOP of doing: accusations without proof.
You are a liar. I know that based on evidence presented on this thread. I do not accuse you of mental illness because that would require a professional examination, and is patently unfair to the mentally ill.
All of the proof put out on this thread stands unchallenged still.
There has been no request for personal information, no response to writing style similarities, no response to the Bananabethanna silliness, no coherent version of your story, no explanation for how your distant cousin performed feats of computer genius during her son’s fatal illness, no explanation for why she would seriously hack your computer three months before starting her insider blog, no proof of the any of the accusations you’ve made against “Corrinne, Corine, and Corinne.”
Intrigued wrote, “The only thing I've had at stake here (beyond a fundamental sense that it's not OK to manipulate people through false pretenses) is my desire to be right about an unraveling mystery.” Intrigued, you are right. Thanks for your reasoned responses and good sleuthing. Normally I would not “high five” in real life, but I do so to you today as a farewell to this thread.
Berlzebub, you have disappointed me on almost every point except one: you continue to post responses that expose the weakness of your position. Thank you on that point.
Berlz,
I admit I came here to find out what "really" happened with the whole Pennmommy saga. I can understand your frustration with all of this and admire your loyalty to P-momma and her family.
P-momma wrote that P1 comes here to read your blog and is an active member of this community. I am wondering when you are going to actually start blogging about the topic you would normally blog about so she could read and comment on things that are not so close to home for her.
Maybe if this blog went back to "regularly scheduled" programming a lot of this would quiet down until P-momma and Pennmommy are ready to address at a more appropriate time.
In the meantime, even though I came across your blog for something completely different, I am interested in reading more of what you usually write.
Let's be realistic here. If adults are emailing your children and harassing them, that would be so easy for any agency to trace. You would report it.
I would like to know how someone obtained children's email addresses anyway.
@ Everyone:
I've done a new post in an attempt to answer some of the comments. Sorry I don't have more time, but I have a life off of the internet.
I'm turning off comments for all posts concerning the P-Momma/Pennmommy fiasco.
Post a Comment