Public Income Statement

I didn’t hide anything, I pressed reply to respond to what you said and that’s what I got. Sheesh, you are paranoid or something that everybody is out to get you.

 

Nothing paranoid about it. You just don't know how to use this website and how the reply button works, and as a result sometimes it's difficult to find your responses. They are buried in the original post.

 

Golly gee, if I am responding to the threads on the original post, wouldn’t that be the place to respond? Straight line thinking.

 

I looked at the statements made in regards to the claims against me, and offer a response.
Criminal Defamation must meet all of the outlined requirements for a criminal case to be filed.

The statement was false and malicious
The post made by the author is not in any way false nor misleading. The post was not a reference for factual information, rather an observation by the author. The opinion offered was a rebuttal to the repeated offenses committed against the author, as well as numerous others who have made attempts to defend or justify their position, only to be verbally attacked by the alleged victim. The written evidence is far too great too provide, but there exists profound evidence of repeated repression of any author who attempts to defend himself in this forum.

Example of harassment posted by alleged victim:

@eyesopen

I think it's time for a new instructor in your passive aggressive class, unless your goal is not to be subtle at all!

This statement is of a malicious nature and is clearly intended to be offensive and harmful to the named poster. This is one example of attacking a registered user for the sole purpose of promoting hate speech and bullying as defined in a legal framework of defense against this same poster claiming to be a victim.

The person who made the statement intended to harm you or acted with reckless disregard for the truth

The statement was one of opinion and the opinion registered is factual and truthful based upon the author’s own experience. In seeking truth within the context of a legal argument, the written evidence is one of conjecture. The author claims no professional standing to assess the mentality or level of impairment of the alleged victim. It is therefore not a matter of criminal defamation as the statement is of a personal opinion and not that of a professional rendering of mental health. The opinion offered was to offer aid to the alleged victim in directing the alleged victim to seek professional resources for additional assistance.
Therefore the truth offered is based upon repeated attacks on the author of varying degrees. The alleged victim repeatedly harasses posters, calling them out by name, then berating and belittling them in a public forum. When the author made an attempt to engage the alleged victim, the author was accused of being callous and was instead attacked by the alleged victim in a disingenuous manner resulting in harm to the author.

In reviewing the significant amount of written evidence authored by the alleged victim, it would be appropriate for the alleged victim to be held accountable for their repeated abuse of those attempting to use the service for the purpose of community engagement.

It would be appropriate for the author to file a counter claim against the alleged victim in light of the evidence presented. The malicious intent by the alleged victim is clear and irrefutable. The evidence is clear the author was presenting truth as a matter of opinion, not a statement of fact.

The author is requesting the immediate removal of alleged victim from being able to write, author or publish any additional material on the community page in question.
The author requests the removal of the web address of the alleged victim as to not allow the alleged victim to open or operate another account on the site now or in the future.
The author requests to be released from any liability associated with the actions of the alleged victim as the burden of proof has not been met under Arizona Revised Statute outlining the requirements needed to be met for Criminal Defamation.
The author will seek punitive damages against the alleged victim in an unspecified amount to be determined by the Arizona District Court.
The author requests a cease and desist order be issued against the alleged victim as to seek relief and redress from the alleged victim immediately.
The author requests the alleged victim be held accountable for the Criminal Defamation action perpetrated against the registered users of said site and be barred from registering as a user of any public platform that would allow the alleged victim to continue to harass, abuse, assault and degrade others.
The author claims protected status as available therefore being free of liability and indemnity from any legal obligation or action brought against the author.

Note: with the exception of the citation of a post by a registered user, no names of actual users were used in the sample provided. The alleged victim cannot sit in judgment of others yet not be held accountable for their behavior and actions against those who would engage in the site. The alleged victim cannot be held harmless based upon the evidence contained within this site. Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily opinions shared by other registered users of this site.

 

Do what you have to do. I have copies of all your posts to/about me, even the deleted ones. I saved them before deletion. So you found the owner of the site? I doubt I will be posting much anyway. Involved in something far more important in SC than a website that has 5 or 6 regular posters who just swear a lot and talk a lot which rarely accomplishes anything. I'll email the owner now with your wishes. We haven't had a chat for a while now.

Link to the super nasty. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wWI4GU0DECkuQm9TP8HaXpSO4HCFrl-O?usp=drive_link

Here is some more info you may need.

STONEWALLING: The first step in any renovation vs. build new project is to determine the condition of the existing facility. Management has refused to have an expert do that evaluation, so no one really knows if it is significantly less expensive to renovate than it is to build new. The reserve study may have some information in it on the condition of the building. The Irony of this story is one member received a quote of $5,000 for a full report from a qualified expert. (It is like a home inspection report). Having a master plan could avoid some of this passive aggressive behavior and would require a repair versus replace analysis.

John Fast, Dec 17, 2024

Welcome to a meandering mixture of random discussions.
Anything goes!
Anyone can participate…
What’s on your mind?

Last edited: Apr 22, 2024

eyesopen, Apr 20, 2024

Well, well, this is a classic demonstration of passive aggressive defer and deflect. Good luck with that insomnia.

John Fast, Apr 21, 2024

BPearson said: ↑

We all watched as the board allowed the former, former gm to enhance and increase her authority and create a setting where her and her management team were the end all be all. With virtually no one attending meetings and even less caring, we created the perfect storm. It worked out beautifully didn't it? Telling everyone to just move here and have fun...what could possibly go wrong?

The interesting aspect of Tom's post is this; the changes that were made over the years makes it easy to see why the general manager overstepped his bounds. Apparently he felt it was in his job description. When the board found out what he had done, they immediately sat down with him and found a temporary fix until tomorrow's exchange meeting. One can only smile as i read about the social media comments proclaiming the libraries are all but gone.

I've been writing and explaining to members since the explosion happened the ultimate outcome would be to maintain the two libraries for 3-5 years with commitments to review the data with each passing year to insure the utilization remains high. I've been told repeatedly it's all just a plot to screw the members and turn them into an indoor dog parks/training arena. Tired of arguing about it...we'll see who knows what they are talking about eh?

Click to expand...

Bill, If I understand VP McAdam's prepared remarks, members of the Board had "informal" conversations on the library leases with the GM to discuss blah blah blah... Cutting through all this passive aggressive mumbo jumbo is difficult for the mere mortal particularly when there is disinformation being spread. The only logical conclusion anyone can come to is Karen and Kat discussed repurposing the libraries with Matthew and moving them to a more "central" location. Wanting to please them and, dare I surmise, with their full knowledge (they are the only Board members authorized to meet with him in a supervisory capacity) he informed the MCLD of our intentions as he was required to do. Now I can't wait to hear from you how you spin this... John

John Fast, Apr 12, 2024

 

Welp. I must admit I have no clue what your post is supposed to mean SCG, however with the little info I was able to glean from it I did send to the site owner and to my attorney. Something was mentioned about names? Does this look familiar? I also have the post where Bill Doxed me.


Until such time I can ever recover my original CMartinez login, I will use this login for the time being. It is I, Carole Martinez, long time contributor, anf former board member. I have not been as active on TOSC as Iwould like to be due to other reasons no worth getting into right now. Having said all of this, I would like to ask some questions.


SunCityGal, Mar 30, 2024


This is the silliest site I have ever been a part of, my bad. Everyone makes mistakes and this was my worst. SCG I have every post you have made here saved since the day I joined. Same for Bill, Dave and Eileen. Einar just makes me smile.


SCG if you have not looked at my link yet you really should. Or I would be happy to send to a FB account if you have one, or a "special" gmail account. Everyone should have one of those.

The other thing I find odd and a little creepy is someone who professes a LOVE for a place, a thing, a city. Don't normal people profess that kind of love for spouses, children, family? I sure like my home. Been coming here since 1980's, moved here in 2001, took care of parents until mid 2007. Should have listened to mom. She was wise way beyond her education.

 

OK, you reposted something I said to EO which was said by John Fast to her as well. (posted above). You have accused me of vile comments among other things. Please post examples. I was ethical enough to do that re your comments to me. BTW there is an exception to the defamation "opinion" clause you mentioned.

It is a moot point right now as I won't be posting much at all anymore. There is no point. Everyone who has a different opinion is chased away, so the 5 of you have fun agreeing with each other. How many great things have you all accomplished since this site's inception in 2013?

Will post responses from the "Your Valley" opinion piece tomorrow. I doubt it will make a difference to you all, but it should.

 

Hello Josie P,

I wish you would stop threatening to sue people for expressing their opinions and viewpoints. In my opinion, the threat of lawsuits has a chilling effect on members willingness to participate. I practiced law for over 40 years and I can proudly say I never had to sue anyone. I always found common ground in any disagreement and was able find a way to work things out. When you decide to become a public figure as you and I have done, you open yourself to a variety of criticism. You may feel that some of the criticism is unfounded, but you willingly exposed yourself to it by becoming a public figure. If you truly believe someone has purposely and consistently spread false and harmful information about you with the intent to defame you, the public figure, you may choose to file a lawsuit. No lawyer I know would pursue such a case without first receiving a substantial retainer of measured in the 10's of thousands.

 

I wish you would research before accusing.
Thank you for your feedback.

1. I have never used the word sue. Please feel free to prove me wrong. I have used the term defamation, which I believe the following is:

“ Josie, I truly believe you are in need of serious mental health support. Anyone who does nothing but try to hurt and name call others, in order to make yourself appear to be right really does need serious behavioral health support. You repeatedly state you are making your statements to point out what was said is wrong.,Someone’s opinion is not wrong, it’s how they perceive the truth of the situation. When you do any writing,? it’s done with such malice and ignorance of the facts are as being presented. I, as well as others, want to continue to use TOSC as a tool for exchange of ideas for the betterment of the community. Your vile comments, followed by pasting many years old portions of posts only exemplifies the fact that you are being immature, childish, selfish and ignorant of current issues that need a positive change to make this community better. Posting old dead segments of posts that are relevant from a historical perspective but not completing the thought only proves your in desperate need of professional help. I do not pity you nor do I care what you do about making yourself better, but at least have human decency to allow others to seek better answers without your attacks. This is the only time I will ever ask you for anything. From this point forward, every time you attack, harass, belittle or otherwise place yourself as judge and jury over someone else’s opinion, I will report your post. This is Talk of Sun City, not Josie’s personal pity part. SunCityGal, Today at 1:25 AM Report”

Diagnosing someone with a mental illness with no degree in Psychology plus never having met the person is pretty defaming in my opinion. And this is one of about 8 slanderous posts.

2. I have taken a lot of grief for pointing out how well SCW runs. I was told to move there along with a lot of other very unking statements. Then Pearson comes out with this today:

“One of the tasks for organizations should be to cultivate new members and future leaders. Prior to 2006, when committees mattered, those opportunities to work in and on ideas that helped shape the community often resulted in them becoming board members.

Many of us have argued for better training for new board members. Several of us have longed for a Sun City West approach where we had something similar to their TORCH program. After 15 years or more, they have provided trained members to fill roles on committees and serving as members of organizations including the Rec Centers of Sun City West (RCSCW). It's been effective for sure.

Being honest, it would take an enormous amount of work to replicate what they have done. It's been built and refined and the RCSCW played an important role in ensuring it succeed. Clearly, the RCSC has shown virtually no interest in replicating that, not even a little.

BPearson, Today at 12:41 PM


3. I have gone over the last few threads and every single one was hijacked each time by the same person. Does not stay on topic, attacks the author and so demeaning and vile to read. This same person believes the moderators are just sitting by and watching for foul language. I truly hope and trust they can see the detrimental effect her continued behavior has on those of us desiring to share like thoughts and enjoy shared ideas.
When starting a new thread, there’s usually a title listed. Not one that I read was “Hijack my thread please and attack anyone who posts”.
To the moderators, please note that 1 person seems to feel it’s their duty to undo and undermine every single post and poster.
Freedom of speech means everyone can have a voice and not be ridiculed or attacked for using it. Doesn’t make sense to try to have any more threads started by this user, as it too, will not stay on topic and be hijacked for her personal pity party.

SunCityGal, Dec 31, 2024 Proof please.


4. Let The Sun Shine In | Talk of Sun City More lies. Need proof here as well.

So Mr. Fast I am not the person who attacks. I respond to attacks. I don’t like to be attacked. Pearson’s first post to me when I joined was an attack and the rest of his loyal followers just joined in. No wonder Sun City has issues. The few on this site are former board members. I have never found the “fun” in dysfunctional. Try reading the opinions in the Independent. There a lot of folks who feel the same as I do.

TOSC has had about 12 years of opinions and not one thing has been accomplished as a result.

 

1. I have never used the word sue. Please feel free to prove me wrong. I have used the term defamation, which I believe the following is

The repeated use of the statement “my attorney ” by the alleged victim is inference of intent to commit to litigation. The alleged victim, through her repeated statement, has made it clear her threat is to sue. To deny the use of a specific word does not change the intent to intimidate posters.

It was through Talk of Sun City several readers came forward to create a supportive group to help the dog park. It was because of like minded individuals working together, without interference, public forums were held and the dog park became a valuable amenity for the community. The blanket statement made by the alleged victim inferring nothing positive occurs through this site is false.

The request for “proof “ is redundant. One merely needs to read the posts by the alleged victim and it’s evident there exists ample writing by the alleged victim of the topic being changed in an attempt to direct the topic to be about the alleged victim.

In reality the alleged victim tries to deflect any responsibility from this poster by accusing others of defamation. In reality, the alleged victim has placed most posters on the defensive because the thread is then hijacked for the alleged victim to challenge the thread, followed by threats of litigation. It’s become extremely difficult to continue a discussion when the thread topic is changed mid conversation for the alleged victim to attempt redirect the topic towards the alleged victim.

I don’t understand why this alleged victim is still an active user of this platform. It’s clear the alleged victim desires to make established posts redirect to the alleged victim choice of topic. Frankly, based upon the rules of participation, I don’t see the alleged victim having adhered to the set guidelines. And her repeated statements about litigation and others not being just or fair mock the terms of participation. The repeated claims against the author are unjustified based upon the evidence of multiple posts published by the alleged victim.

Being the author, I choose to ignore this alleged victim from this point forward. I will not entertain or respond to any further comments about anything I create on this site. It’s extremely clear the alleged victim has an agenda which is not in line with the intent of the site. In my opinion, the alleged victim only enjoins others for the sole purpose of intimidation. This is proven by the repeated statement of having copied every post with the intention to cause harm.

The author has been ill, and is no longer interested in enjoining or promoting the self grandiosity by the alleged victim of being harmed. There exists profound amounts of evidence to support opinions shared by the author. The repeated goading of the site participants by the alleged victim is clearly a violation of the terms of engagement for the site as well as a defendable position within a legal framework. It is at this time the author remains a member of the Talk of Sun City, but will not participate or engage in any activity, discussion, exchange or other interaction that may be considered communication with the alleged victim.

Once again, in proving my point, no name or user ID was mentioned, yet one specific person will chime in to attempt to further debase and degrade the author.

 

Wasn't Duffyland donated by a resident and RCSC eventually purchased it? I do remember something about closing Duffyland after a taser incident and if memory serves me correctly that issue was published in the Independent and that's when the park users got together to fight the closing. As for your proposed dog park in phase 1 it never materialized. 2nd Dog Park | Talk of Sun City

Not everyone who consults with an attorney has the intent to sue. Bill said how much he dislikes when people twist his statements. Guessing most people do.