Does my wife have to answer the door?

[diabeticman]

I posted about last week when the neighbors down stairs called the cops on my wife claiming they heard pounding. My wife had been sleeping got up to use the bathroom. Yes, the sheets got wrapped around her legs so she did do couple hop steps to keep from falling and get out of the sheets. She went to the bathroom and was about ready to fall completely back to sleep when she heard pounding on the door. She tried to ignore it. Person kept knocking It ended up being a cop who told her to walk softly.


We have no peep hole in our door nor can we put one in or a dead bolt. Condo rules... They own the door. I told my wife especially since I got a new job and unfortunately I am still on Midnights for a little while longer BUT I told my wife from the time I leave DO NOT open that door or answer it anytime during the night unless you know who is on the other side.


She is afraid that if the cops show up again they will break the door down if she doesn't answer.

[DURHAM D]

1. Are you renting or do you own your condo?

[diabeticman]

4. We own the Condo.

[DURHAM D]

11. Maybe you have tried this already but

if not, write the Association/Board of Directors and tell them you feel unsafe and concerned for your safety and your family's safety. You might also ask when the next board meeting is and ask to be put on the agenda in order to address safety concerns.

Does the Condominium Association have a professional management firm? or do they self manage? Do not address your letter to the management firm, if they have one, but address to the Board of Directors at whatever mailing address has been provided to you.

Frankly, I can't believe they will not allow a peep hole. In fact, not allowing deadbolts as well as peep holes is unheard of in this day and age. Do any of the board members live in the community?

Regardless, put your safety concerns in writing. If they have half a wit that should scare the bjesuz out of them and they should grant you permission to install both of the above items.

[diabeticman]

12. They have the excuse that there is a security door which leads to all 4 condos in this building and

you have to be buzzed in. Well we have found keys in the security door. We have see the security door NOT security closed to be locked.

[DURHAM D]

13. Regardless, I can think of no reason

to prohibit deadbolts and peep holes. How big is the complex? Is there an on-site property management group? Exactly who have you spoken to?

Edit: Did you ask them to pay for it or did you offer to pay for it yourself?

[NYC_SKP]

16. I'm on my condo board, you might want to mention their liability.

Do this in a nonthreatening way, however.

Once they are given notice that there's a concern, they are on notice and liable if the police do break down your door one day or something worse happens to you or any other tenant.

A peep hole in the main door does NOT eliminate the need for one on your door, people can gain entry past that first door in any number of ways.

Send a letter, certified, or bring it up at the next HOA meeting.

[DURHAM D]

22. Exactly re: liability.

Their exposure is off the hook once the board receives notice. The reason I was asking about management is that often they don't know what they are doing and don't even bother to pass on safety concerns to the Board of Directors.

[diabeticman]

52. They NEVER have condo meetings. We are the youngest people here. They are old retired people.

They do all votes by ballot.

[steve2470]

55. I live in a condo also....

and we DO have condo meetings. We also have plenty of retired people here. I'd ask some pointed questions about meetings. That doesn't seem legal to me. It really does not.

[diabeticman]

57. Believe me. If I knew then what I know now I wouldn't have bought. There only 8 condos in the

association. We are the youngest owners.

[steve2470]

58. do this...

type the name of your state and "condominium law" into Google or Bing etc. Your state probably has a government department devoted to regulating condos. My state does.

I'd be shocked if your condo was allowed to NOT have person to person meetings. I really would be.

eta: http://www.myfloridalicense.com/Dbpr/lsc/condominiums.html

That's for my state.

[diabeticman]

60. Thanks I will.

[diabeticman]

63. I found this:

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=68&div=0&chpt=33&sctn=8&subsctn=0


I think I will be getting a lawyer or at the very least writing a letter to the association President and Treasure that they are in violation of state law the last ballot votes was illegal in that vote they raised condo fees banned any pets from visiting or living here. They decided that all deck attached to each unit (even though attached to the individual units. are now common areas that they can determine that each deck will have a hard roof instead of the awing we have now.


I did read that right?

[steve2470]

64. I'm not a lawyer

If I were you, I'd try to settle things friendly before you get a lawyer. Once you get a lawyer, things get tense in a hurry and much much more expensive.

Hopefully there's only a misunderstanding going on. If not, you can always get a lawyer.

[diabeticman]

65. True. I will try the letter.

[steve2470]

66. I would try a pleasant, tactful friendly face to face chat FIRST....

Letters are the first step to lawsuits. It's documentation and puts them on formal legal notice. No, it's not considered service of a lawsuit, but you are putting them on notice, if they have any intelligence at all.

I have plenty of lawyers in my family, so I know what I'm talking about, and been to law school myself. Keep it casual and friendly AT FIRST. You can always escalate if they are complete idiots.

[diabeticman]

68. I will do my best. My wife isn't on good terms with them.

With the parking and the satellite issues and the whole pet thing--First only weekend visits then when the rules stated Pets they told us that only meant dogs and the rule was really for one person.

It has just been a mess.

[MADem]

79. Make sure you keep an exact copy of what you sent them.

If you do, you probably won't need it!

[steve2470]

93. +1 nt

[pnwmom]

81. They own the door. So can you give them the door and put up a new one with a peephole?

Or do they have covenants against peepholes? What about security cameras?

[SammyWinstonJack]

193. LOL.

[mrmpa]

5. He owns it....eom

[elleng]

2. No, she does not have to open the door.

If someone knocks, and they tell her they're cops, she should ask them for some kind of i.d., like slipping it under the door or having their 'commanders' call her on the phone.

She should, thus, 'answer' the knock, but not open the doo. Police should understand why a woman doesn't want to open the door to a stranger.

[diabeticman]

7. He never annouced himself he just kept knocking. She knew it was the cops when she saw his uniform.

[KittyWampus]

108. How did she see his uniform? You said you have no peep hole.

[cwydro]

110. Yeah, I figured she would at least ASK "who is it?"

But that still would not enable her to see the uniform.

[SammyWinstonJack]

192. heh. It's a mystery.

[EL34x4]

10. Better yet, she should call the police on their non-emergency line.

Tell them there are men outside her door claiming to be police officers and ask if actual officers have been dispatched to your home.

[Hoppy]

14. That would be my response. Call the non-emerg. number.

[DawgHouse]

21. This is good advice.

I would also put a peep hole in. That's just a common sense safety precaution. If you have to ask for permission, that's a very strange thing indeed!

[SheilaT]

23. In the middle of the night the non-emergency number may

not be answered.

This is a case where calling 911 herself would be appropriate.

[reddread]

48. 911 is always approriate

if you have an emergency, this is one of the few times you will get your moneys worth as a taxpayer.
Now, getting a recording saying all operators are busy is a little less bang for the buck,
but dont think twice enlisting their aid.
they can and will take care of you quickly.

[brewens]

3. No. She does not have to answer the door. The cops should have to get a warrent to bust in.

Of course it doesn't mean they won't but it's unlikely in a situation like that. You don't know it's a cop for sure either.

[Malraiders]

6. pretty much my opinion but Police need a warrant to bust

into an apartment. Some warrants are no knock and some are knock and wait.

If a policeman thinks a crime is in progress they can bust down a door to gain entry.

Or if an emergency is evident they can bust a door and enter for the safety of people. Like Fire o0r seeing a person passed out inside.

[diabeticman]

8. We own our condo.

[CreekDog]

213. why didn't you answer the question above about how she saw the uniform if she didn't open the door

and there's no peephole?

think of something. jeez.

[Hoppy]

17. Legally, you are right. But busting down the door is fun.

"I heard a toilet flushing and thought drugs were being flushed."

"I heard a muffled voice and thought it was someone in danger."

[bettyellen]

9. If it happens again, you should go to the cops and complain about being harassed by them.

[Warpy]

24. ...Or harassed by Nosy Parker downstairs

who uses the cops to do his/her dirty work.

[bettyellen]

59. That is what I meant- report the neighbors for harassment.

[SMC22307]

15. The cops in your area have so much free time on their hands...

that they can show up -- that quickly -- to someone's home because of a couple of hops across a floor? Right.

How can your condo deny you a peep hole... aren't they considered a safety feature? I'd fight that one. Same as the deadbolt.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Many States and Cities require peepholes on the doors of rented units, so if ANY units are EVER

rented in your building, I would instantly check the laws regarding security requirements for rental units in your State, County and City. It is an unusual thing to forbid, something which is actually required in so many places and which is a security measure highly recommended by all forms of law enforcement all over the world.

[LeftyMom]

20. We get it, you're married.

Does every event in yours and your wife's life merit a thread?

[MisterP]

25. even if you don't have stones, cholecystectomy can do wonders for buildups of bile

[CreekDog]

75. I think you're confused about who has posted "bile"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4398194

[snooper2]

111. yes, because everyone is an innocent butterfly and nobody ever tries to game the system

[CreekDog]

215. the post is nonsense, not sure what's stopping you from seeing that

First, it claims to have been written by diabeticman's wife.

But there's an odd thing. No commas. Not a single one. Other thing, diabeticman doesn't use commas.

So I asked him about that and he said he was transcribing what she said.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

26. I was wondering why his wife doesn't just sign up for DU and post herself. Disclaimer enclosed...

I like diabeticman, but it does get old that post after post deals with issues and happenings in his wife's life without any input from his wife.

[CreekDog]

30. Then we could hear what happens in the husband's life

[alcibiades_mystery]

72. ROFL

Indeed!

[SammyWinstonJack]

195. LOL.

[tammywammy]

34. I thought she had an account here at one point. Can't remember the name though. n/t

[CreekDog]

76. nope she never did, way back when it was claimed that she was posting using his account

and then I noticed that they both had never used a single comma in any of their posts, not just his, but those that were claimed to be her posts under his name.

then he claimed he had been transcribing her thoughts or words on the matter.

perfectly understandable that you might think that she had her own account, given the way those posts were done, but ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4398194

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4404795

[Violet_Crumble]

97. Hey, we've now got the solution for Mrs Diabetman's problem in the other thread...

'BUT what really burns me up is the person in the apartment about ours she is on welfare has no desire to get a job gloats she is on welfare gets drunk every night and if she and her "Old Man"--who does work--aren't arguing and slamming doors they are fucking each other and we can hear it through the ceiling.'

Easy. Call the cops. With their rapid response to hopping across a floor, they'll be there before the couple upstairs have finished!

But wouldn't you think someone who's sooo sensitive to noise from an upstairs apartment would be a bit more considerate of their downstairs neighbours and instead of jumping across the floor in the middle of the night, untangle themselves from a sheet before they get out of bed?

[B2G]

143. He says downthread they are in the top unit

So how they hear someone making noise ABOVE them is beyond me.

[Violet_Crumble]

145. I wondered the same thing before but worked it out...

The penny didn't drop before I saw the dates and remembered that they'd upgraded from renting an apartment to buying a condo somewhere else between those posts...

[tammywammy]

147. That's from before they bought the condo.

They used to live in an apartment.

[B2G]

150. Thanks. It's hard to keep up with the saga.

[Texasgal]

38. His wife sounds like she needs

some help actually.

DB:

Your wife seems depressed and in need of some sort of mental health help. You need to stop screwing around on DU and get her some help. Nobody here can help her in that way. I'm not being rude, I am being honest. I feel sorry for her, something is going on there. Please take her to a doctor!

[tammywammy]

47. That's why they were fighting with the condo board to allow pets.

She was depressed and they wanted to get a cat. The condo board voted to continue to not allow pets.

Based off his posts, it's been one thing after another with the condo and their neighbors. I don't think they did the research before buying and considering all the issues they have with their neighbors the common denominator is diabeticman & his wife.

[Texasgal]

53. It appears that DB has not

helped his wife get some help, this is just based on what he himself has posted.

Just from my opinion it looks like his spouse is in some need of help. The continuation of these posts without any update on getting his wife some help is worrisome.

I hope she will be okay.

[alcibiades_mystery]

73. A GoFundme request is not far behind!

[PasadenaTrudy]

188. She has gotten help

I hate talking about people behind their backs, so to speak, but according to his Lounge posts, she has. I won't go into detail of course out of respect.

[trueblue2007]

290. oh my gosh. get a life. stop calling people menatlly unbalance. (are you a shrink ???)

And.... you are being rude.

[CreekDog]

29. Some merit two or three

Or so it would seem.

[Bosonic]

35. Plot twist : He isn't married

[imnew]

87. From reading the links in this thread that's obvious

[CBGLuthier]

69. I really am in awe of his magical powers that forced you

to not only read his thread but then made your fingers type your complaints about his thread.

Awesome. Truly awesome.

[DashOneBravo]

78. I agree

[alcibiades_mystery]

71. Come on, this is the best performance art on DU

I mean, obviously, there is no wife, and all these stories are invented for some bizarre reason, but they really are amusing if you just take them as entertainment.

[JI7]

77. do you remember cuban liberal and his fake boyfriend padraig ?

[cwydro]

156. That rings a faint bell with me...

When was that?

[ScreamingMeemie]

203. May 2, 2005... A day that will live in infamy or as long as we can access DU2 inboxes.

I just found a message about it in mine.

[cwydro]

206. I think I joined after that,

so I must have heard about it later.

Too lazy to check my profile right now, but I think I joined in September of 05.

Somehow I remember it though.

How did folks catch on to the fake boyfriend etc? Curious.

[ScreamingMeemie]

207. Apparently, they had a rather large Internet presence.

Paddy (Padraig) had solicited money for a "brother" to come to America from Ireland and Tony (CubanLiberal) had a brother who "died in Iraq." The stories didn't match up across the board, more info was found and "they" were booted. They were always on the odd side, but too many stories stopped really making sense.

[cwydro]

210. Thanks for the info...

Kinda reminds me of two Lounge peeps who apparently made up a lot of BS about their association with gay causes.

I never knew that was fake until recently when another poster mentioned it.

[JI7]

208. i don't remember the details but he was anti choice , defended Catholic Church bigotry

so people already had issues with them(or rather him).

cuban liberal himself was real but he made up the fake boyfriend(padraig) and would more often post as the fake boyfriend and would always talk about how great cuban liberal(himself) was. but usually not the other way around.

but when you look at how they were supposed to be in their 20s yet they mentioned all these careers and businesses they had and started you could tell something was up.

but he would always post things to get sympathy .

the one that stands out the most is the soldier that died that he claimed was a relative . he did it to get sympathy for himself .

[ScreamingMeemie]

212. Paddy was also "very ill" with "back problems."

It's why I have become such a cynic with Internet illness stories and people's willingness to share all of the details. I got totally suckered on that one...until the Great Pharmacy War.

[ScreamingMeemie]

202. That one sucked big time.

it was a weird ying/yang thing. I was pretty "tight" (or so I thought) with CL. It's why I hold most people on the Internets at arms' arms' length anymore.

[cwydro]

204. Gah!

I remember the two, but not details.

The price of aging I suppose.

[JI7]

209. you probably remember them from others mentioning them , not from actually being here

at the same time. and they were mentioned for a long time afterwards. but they haven't gotten much mention in recent years. probably because a lot of people who use to be here are no longer, and a lot of newer people. and just with time .

[betsuni]

94. I love it, look forward to every new installment of The Wife of Diabeticman's Tale. nt

[BainsBane]

98. oh, this is the funniest thread since

Dr. Oz took on Monsanto.

[polly7]

101. Or when your sock and you were both lecturing me in the same thread on the those dirty FEMEN

girls. Right?

Now that was funny.

Glass houses and all that ........

[R B Garr]

104. Well, well. That didn't take long...

[polly7]

114. Well, well, well, well, well, well, well ..............

[R B Garr]

118. 7 wells, oh my, how I rate.

[polly7]

119. That was out of 100, sorry ..... should have added that.

[R B Garr]

124. Wow, I rate 100 wells. Zowie!

Nope, didn't take long at all.

[NuclearDem]

170. Somebody's working towards another vacation already!

[polly7]

174. Are you? Cool, where ya going? nt.

[NuclearDem]

177. Seriously, you just got back and are already starting shit completely unprovoked.

Well done!

[polly7]

178. No, just responding to the funny threads convo that was going on.

Was is private?

[HughBeaumont]

196. This seems like RBTexLa Lite.

[CreekDog]

214. Each of these OP's is like a chapter in a Choose Your Own Adventure

[Jesus Malverde]

226. coastguard stories. That was drama....nt

[cwydro]

227. That was one of the best!

Wonder if that poster is still here???

[pinboy3niner]

234. Ryan Fitzomething was PPRd as a troll by EarlG

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=319587&sub=trans

And here is the classic coastguard war story thread:

Darren Wilson's Lack of Remorse (original unedited title)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025993534

[SammyWinstonJack]

194. Apparently so.

[AngryAmish]

28. Cops are like vampires. never let them in.

[NV Whino]

31. I call BS.

It's your door. It's your safety. It cannot be illegal to install a peephole and deadbolt.

And sign your wife (or other persona) up. I'm tired of second hand stories.

[SammyWinstonJack]

198. Good call.

[kentauros]

32. Can you install a small webcam?

Prices range from dirt-cheap on up. Wireless, too

[seabeyond]

33. i really want about the cops. wife gets up, stumbles, pees, gets to bed and the cops are there.

what town is that. cause man, 3 or 4 minutes tops. and the cops arrive for too loud noise in a condo with a couple minutes, including the neighbor deciding to make that call

I told my wife from the time I leave DO NOT open that door or answer it

this raised a bit of an eyebrow, too

[gollygee]

37. Yeah that's amazing

we have a fast police response here but not that fast, and not for noise in a condo. I mean someone would have to call the police, and the dispatcher would have to answer and get the necessary information, and then the dispatcher would have to contact an officer to send out there. That doesn't happen immediately. Even an emergency takes longer than a potty break.

[diabeticman]

44. when you live a half mile from the township police department?

[gollygee]

162. When you live next door to the police department. n/t

[Texasgal]

39. More than an eyebrow...

I feel although his wife is in great need of some help.

[diabeticman]

43. We happen to live about 1/2 mile from the Township police station office. The Fire Department is

located there as well.

[Lex]

46. And they go out on calls about thumps in an upstairs apartment?

They sure are responsive.

[reddread]

49. you better hope so

obviously the concern was the possibility of domestic abuse, not some asshole neighbor's need for sleep.

[diabeticman]

51. yeah. it is a condo. We own it whatever you want to call it.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

74. You didn't bother to write the rest of what he said.

..."from the time I leave DO NOT open that door or answer it anytime during the night unless you know who is on the other side".

[seabeyond]

86. Because it was not relevant to my point. Nt

[Boudica the Lyoness]

95. At least it wasn't pointless.

And that's the point.

[polly7]

100. Then why would you chop 'his point' in half, just to have something to 'raise your eyebrows'

over? Sounded like good advice to me - I'd also tell someone who was already worried the same thing.

[R B Garr]

105. Well, well. That didn't take long...

[Violet_Crumble]

112. What didn't? n/t

[R B Garr]

116. That. That's what.

Duh.

[Violet_Crumble]

121. Oh, you mean someone replying to a post saying the same thing several others have?

Yeah, it doesn't take long for DUers to post and say they disagree with something.


Fucking duh

[polly7]

126. The whistle went out ............

Hey Violet

[Violet_Crumble]

136. And a pretty low quality whistle from the looks of it...

Heya polly! I was just down in the I/P forum for the first time in ages and saw you'd started an OP there and was going to pop in and say hello, but the whole Primus/Bon Jovi thing distracted me

[polly7]

140. Ok, I'm totally clueless on the Primus/Bon Jovi thing so will have to look that up.

Lots of great new OPs in the I/P forum. Lots of them sad. So much crap going on all over the world right now. It's good to see you.

Ugh. I see the Primus / Bon Jovi threads right now in I/P. I'm not sure how I missed them.

[R B Garr]

181. Ah, so why ask questions if you really know what it's all about?

Low, indeed.

[polly7]

113. You again.

[R B Garr]

120. Yeah, that didn't take long at all to work up to that.

[polly7]

123. What'cha garbling about? nt.

[R B Garr]

125. *blushes* *acts innocent*

Yes, whatever could this be about?

[polly7]

128. It was about dishonestly cutting off a full quote to use as an excuse to

be outraged - over - I guess, a man telling/ordering his wife not to open the door.

Now your turn - I repeat, what are you garbling about?

[R B Garr]

129. It was about who you were responding to. Not what you describe here.

Duh.

[polly7]

131. I'll respond to whoever the fuck I want to.

Is there a rule here that says otherwise?

[R B Garr]

134. Yeah...that didn't take long AT ALL......

[polly7]

138. You must be having some sort of weird convo with yourself that I can't decipher.

Good for you for getting it out though, maybe someone can help you with it.

[Violet_Crumble]

144. All I know is it involves a shitload of random smilies...

I'm heading off to bed, so I'm leaving our fan of random smilies with something to use any time another DUer replies to someone else that they've deemed a No Go Zone...



G'night

[polly7]

146. LOL. Very cute.

Have a good sleep : - )

[R B Garr]

239. Aw, and here you are the expert on internet offenses after all, yet you asked me

a very disingenuous question. Now why would you go asking a very disingenuous question. Look at all the time you wasted feigning confusion when you knew all along what those attacks were about.

Yeah, so G'night and God Bless America.

[Violet_Crumble]

251. Okay, I've got no idea what yr going on about now...

And when it comes to wasting time, I've spent a limited amount of time on yr posts. If you give me something to work with I can waste more time...

Yr a day late with the G'night. And onward to Alaska!

[R B Garr]

152. Oh, you can decipher it just fine. U betcha.

You've got it nailed. Yes you do.

[polly7]

154. Ooooooh, smilies galore! ...........

But no, I really can't. If you'd like to explain it to me, I'm all ears.

[R B Garr]

165. And here comes the repetition...

And here comes the repetition...

Very predictable. It's all very predictable.

Very predictable. It's all very predictable.

[Violet_Crumble]

139. See, this is the thing about DU. People can reply to whoever they want to...

You don't like it? That falls into the tough shit category. How about trying to focus on what people say rather than who's replying to who?

[R B Garr]

149. OH, LOL, now that's downright funny coming from you.

hehe. You must be kidding...?

[Violet_Crumble]

153. I don't recall that I've been haranguing people and demanding they don't respond to another DUer...

Maybe it happened in that alternate universe DU where I'm also a cheerleader for killing folk who draw cartoons of Mohammed, and where I enjoy posting clips of the Eagles. That's a weird, fucked up place, that alternate reality DU!

[R B Garr]

183. "I don't recall" No, you don't recall.

[Violet_Crumble]

244. I don't recall because I've never done it n/t

[R B Garr]

245. Yeah, You keep telling yourself that. n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

247. I'm telling you. That's not something I've ever done...

If you think I have, feel free to provide some links...

[R B Garr]

249. Your own post #139 in this thread.

Quote from your post: "How about trying to focus on what people say rather than who's replying to who?"

It's fun to keep things so confusing but, really, just look back at the numbered posts in this thread and you'll see who* attacked whom* out of the blue in a very bizarre fashion. They are favorite targets.

So you know very well that your comment: "How about trying to focus on what people say rather than who's replying to who?" is disingenuous hooey. This happens a lot. U betcha.

*edited out the names, but follow the numbered posts where this started. You can do this!

[Violet_Crumble]

252. Things are obviously confusing for you...

You seem to be unable to tell the difference between an attack and responding to what someone else has said about the topic of a thread. Because the latter is what you've been getting all outraged and nasty about.


What's clear is that you came into this thread to cause fights and yr single-mindedly focused on doing so. Poor Diabeticman. Yr hijacking his thread! Shame on you!!

Dog bless Lithuania!

[R B Garr]

254. Ah yes, more of the confusion scam! lol, follow the numbered posts.

They are clear who came into this thread to attack two favorite targets. You obviously don't care who is attacked if they are favorite targets. That's what clear. You asked for a link, and I referred you back to your own post in this thread. DUH.

[Violet_Crumble]

255. You need to slow down and take a few breaths before continuing...

Here's what I said: 'You seem to be unable to tell the difference between an attack and responding to what someone else has said about the topic of a thread. Because the latter is what you've been getting all outraged and nasty about.'

This is the post yr calling an attack: 'Then why would you chop 'his point' in half, just to have something to 'raise your eyebrows'
over? Sounded like good advice to me - I'd also tell someone who was already worried the same thing.'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6654274

Where's the attack in that? That's right. There's no attack there. Yr getting all bent out of shape because someone you hate dared to reply to a post by one of yr buddies who was discussing the OP by also discussing the OP. Yr the one who arrived in a flurry of rage and indignation.

[R B Garr]

260. This is just more of the feigned confusion scam. It didn't go your way, so you

switch tactics.

Link to where I'm getting a

"flurry of rage"
"indignation"
"all outraged and nasty about"

Your revised feigned confusion tactic is to thwart my use of the word "hostility" in relation to polly attacking two favorite targets, of which there is a long and documented history on this site.

This feigned confusion scam is run a lot here by certain posters who like to attack and then feign confusion. So you relax and take a deep breath too. No need to get all pissy and outraged and hostile and bent out of shape.

[Violet_Crumble]

263. I don't know where you see feigned confusion in the post you replied to...

I copied and pasted the post you insist is an attack and showed that it clearly wasn't. No feigned confusion there.

Sorry, but yr posts in this thread have been a bit nasty towards me. I don't know you from a bar of soap apart from taking a look at yr posting history when I saw some of the juror comments from people who are familiar with you in one of the alerts last night. Perhaps if you don't want people to get the impression that I got then you could dial things down a bit and talk TO people rather than talking AT them...

[R B Garr]

266. Link to where you confuse anything said I with "nasty".

I have to LOL at your phony observation about Jury comments, which is largely a vendetta system, and most of them didn't comment anyway, lol).

Your feigned confusion tactics haven't worked so you have to gather more reinforcements to obfuscate the shit out of some posts that were easily understood 24 hours ago. Of course, that leads to the potential for hidden posts, so you have that going for you.

BTW, how many times have you alerted on this site? I know exactly how many times I have: ONE time.

[Violet_Crumble]

269. You told me I was disingenous just for starters...

There's nothing phony about me pointing out that the only alerts that we know of are on polly and both of them were bogus alerts.

See, this is where I think you get nasty when you don't need to. 'Your feigned confusion tactics', 'gather more reinforcements' 'obfuscate the shit'. There's no need for that. I don't feign confusion and aren't confused, I fly solo so that gather more reinforcements thing is just silly, and I'm trying to be as clear and civil as possible when dealing with you.

In answer to yr question. I have no idea. Not a whole lot. I tend to alert on blatantly bigoted posts and got a 7-0 hide on one the other night where someone suggested sending Muslims to internment camps. Why? Is there some contest going on?

[R B Garr]

273. Read your post 112 in this thread questioning me, yet here you are

displaying an incredible concern and breadth of knowledge about what polly meant and what her intentions were in attacking some favorite targets in an even more incredible mind meld display of understanding, so there was no need to ask me that when you already knew exactly.

That's what I meant by your disingenuous question.

That's why I said to go back and read the numbered posts. It will help clear up the confusion so you don't have to worry about civility. It's a colossal waste of time to feign confusion.

[polly7]

276. If you want to know what I meant and what my intentions were, ask ME!!!!! nt.

[R B Garr]

283. No need for so much anger and hostility.

Calm down and relax and have a great day.

[polly7]

284. No anger and hositlity here.

You just seem to need reminded over and over and over again that it was me, and not Violet who you've been stalking and pretending to be outraged with your 'anger and hostility' at a simple question I asked.

I think it's dishonest as hell to chop up someone's sentence to feign outrage over the part left that could be taken to be misogynist and bullying. Get it? I asked about it. Get over it. If it happens again, I'll ask again.

See. Easy as that.

[R B Garr]

285. We've already been over this. It just didn't go your way.

So here you are again.

You have a history of attacking the two posters you attacked for no good reason whatsoever. A long established history. Everyone else was questioning the story as well, but you attacked those two, and one bizarre attack was about some FEMEN women from fucking years ago.

The feigned confusion scam really gets old.

[polly7]

286. No, I have a history of replying to their call-outs of me, their bullying of others who don't

deserve that kind of shit, and their attempts to malign posters by changing their words. I do it to everyone I see doing the same, so no ...... as much as you want to make them 'victims' of something or other, you really need to concentrate not only what people are saying to them, but to anyone else as well. If someone is going to joke about someone else using a sock - I don't think they'd mind at all being reminded of their own sock - do you??? It's bizarre to believe they wouldn't expect it.

Awwies. I replied on a thread. Is this a private thread in some group? Let me check and make sure ............... - nope - GD. Where I'm as free to reply as you are.

Get it?

Got it?

Good.

[R B Garr]

288. Nothing you say is credible. You attacked them and now you're

trying to deflect. WTF does FEMEN from two fucking years ago have to do with anything in your attack? It doesn't. It was just an attack to get someone to respond so you can start this charade with some long-established favorite targets.

Why don't you go bug the ATA forum and ask about the sockpuppet incident. That makes more sense.

[polly7]

289. The sock was being used in the FEMEN thread, that's what.

At the same time as her identity now. Both were replying to me in the same thread - which happened to turn into disparaging the FEMEN women. Is that so hard to understand??? She was joking about someone else's thread and socks - I reminded her of her own, specifically on that thread.

I don't care if you think I'm credible. I've never written anything but the truth here, so what I know makes what you spout off really funny, in a sad sort of way (for you). Look in a mirror ........... k?

You use 'attack' a lot! Again - look in a mirror.

[R B Garr]

291. Sigh. FEMEN had nothing to do with anything in your attack.

Nothing. It was just a way to kick sand on someone to continue your long-ago hostilities. You have to admit at some point even to yourself that your initial posts attacking two favorite targets was based on hostility. There was nothing going on that provoked your onslaught that is documented here in the numbered posts to which I've referred to many times.

Anyway, I doubt you will post about the sockpuppet in ATA because that's been thoroughly vetted on every level for several years now. Yes, indeed.

And just yesterday you were saying you were so happy for me, now you're sad. WTF ever, lol, it's too silly to contemplate what that's supposed to be about in your mind.

Seriously, though, have a great day!

[polly7]

292. LOL.

[Violet_Crumble]

277. I'm not rereading anything. I copied and pasted the post you claimed was an attack...

It wasn't. There was no attack in it and it doesn't take anything but the most basic reading comprehension skills to be able to see that.

I don't ask disingenuous questions. You posted something saying only 'that didn't take long' and I asked 'what didn't?' I was expecting the reply to explain what 'that' was, but instead I got 'that. that's what'. If I had known what 'that' was, I wouldn't have asked you in the first place...

Yet again, I'm not confused, nor feigning confusion.

[R B Garr]

281. Your own posts in this thread prove that's not true.

Your incredible mind meld with everything polly says and does reveals your depth of understanding and your deep concern.

And this repetition is yet another tactic of the feigned confusion scam. And this repetition is yet another tactic of the feigned confusion scam.

[seabeyond]

148. 3 yrs of this shit, same people, same shit, they are too easy to ignore.

it is predictable.

[R B Garr]

151. Very predictable! I've seen a couple posts since the return, and then

RIGHT back like a beeline to attacking the usuals. It's just nutty, and you're right -- very predictable.

[polly7]

157. Nah ....... calling out a dishonest post isn't 'attacking' anyone,

and no-one here is a special snowflake that can get away with doing it and not be called out for it.

Do you agree?

Did you post your garbling, incoherent rant to the other poster who called her on it?

[R B Garr]

161. Hey, you stole special snowflake from the Magistrate.

Your exchange with him got you a couple hides. Talk about garble.

[polly7]

164. No. Special snowflake has been a saying for - decades. Sorry, strike two. nt.

[R B Garr]

166. No strikes here.

But I still see your strikes.

[polly7]

168. That's great! I'm very happy for you.

Eyesight is so important. Here is a great site:

http://www.allaboutvision.com/nutrition/foods.htm

[R B Garr]

171. Yes, it's thrilling. I'm so very happy, too.

[Ruby the Liberal]

218. This was alerted as well

Guessing they are trying every post just to see if they can get something.

On Mon May 11, 2015, 02:26 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

No. Special snowflake has been a saying for - decades. Sorry, strike two. nt.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6655172

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

It's inappropriate to call another DUer a "special snowflake" suggesting that they can get away with breaking the rules.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon May 11, 2015, 02:30 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Guessing you didn't get the results you wanted on another alert so trying this one? Saying "special snowflake is an expression that has been around for decades" isn't inappropriate. Better luck next time.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: you're both fighting like children and now you are whining to mommy
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This alert message is so inaccurate that I'm tempted to call it deliberately dishonest. I'm getting more than a whiff of alert-stalking here.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[polly7]

220. Lol Thanks Ruby : - )

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Lots of tired alert fingers by now I'm sure.

[Violet_Crumble]

222. Ruby! Long time, no see!

I'm with juror 5. There is a bit of an alert-stalking vibe there. I mean, seriously? Someone's all bent out of shape because they found out The Magistrate didn't invent the term 'special snowflake' and holds some sort of copyright over its use? It's been round for ages...

[R B Garr]

236. Yeah, the posts are numbered, so you can see who attacked whom

and how unsubstantiated and bizarre it was. But here's the dealio: it doesn't matter if they are people you don't mind seeing attacked. Is that how it works?

And I've never seen anyone use special snowflake until after The Magistrate used it, so link to it or sink.

[Violet_Crumble]

248. You came into this thread attacking polly. I'm not the only person who's pointed that out...

How the fuck is someone pointing out to another poster that they cut off part of a sentence that changed the meaning of that sentence attacking someone?

And I think you need to put the mirror down. Yr the one who's in here attacking people and carrying on because you think there's certain special DUers that you don't want people replying to.

As for the universal usage of special snowflake, here's a link.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=special+snowflake

Let me know what other words or phrases the Magistrate uses that are on yr list that DUers should never ever use. I'm pretty sure that the Magistrate would think this outrage about the use of a term that he used is silly....

[R B Garr]

253. No, lol, wrong again. I've seen this scam that goes on many times now.

Just follow the numbered posts. You can do it. polly came into the thread attacking two favorite targets for no valid reason except to display hostility. So I just pointed it out, hence my comment to you: DUH.

You provide a link where I said anything about wanting a list of words The Magistrate used, or are you feigning confusion again. So much feigned confusion. Talk about silly.

You provide a link on this website where special snowflake was used before The Magistrate used it.

Seriously, this is just a feigned confusion scam on people here. This nonsense gets old.

[Violet_Crumble]

258. Uh-huh. So now yr seeing scams everywhere...

Y'know, for someone who has a problem with people displaying hostility, maybe you could work on dialling yrs back several notches? Just a suggestion that I'm guessing will go unheeded, but you do seem to get very angry about stupid shit that no-one else cares about like the special snowflake thing.

Speaking of which, are you now making out that if someone uses a universal term first at DU, then they've got dibs on it and anyone else who uses it after them is dissing them?* It's just that I saw you downthread insisting that the Magistrate had been dissed in this thread. As a very old friend of his, if someone was dissing him in this thread I'd be ignoring the gnats buzzing round and going in to deliver a bit of a wordy arse kicking. But that hasn't happened, so that's why I'm still with you...

* I was the First DUer Ever to use G'day and G'night. You used G'night in this thread. This could be a breach of the Special Snowflake DU Copyright Code. That I could have been dissed so savagely is quite disturbing!

[Ruby the Liberal]

241. Heya VC!

I call my cat 'little miss special snowflake' because she thinks she is one.

[Violet_Crumble]

246. LOL. My daughter went through a stage where I referred to her as that as well n/t

[R B Garr]

237. Who are "they"? I've only alerted once -- on March 30 just

a month and a half ago. Who is "they"?

[Ruby the Liberal]

240. What?

I have no idea what you are asking. "They" in this context would be the person who sent the alert on that post with the comment they chose to include. If someone called someone a "special snowflake", I could see it - but it reads like that happened in another post and it wasn't hidden, so someone alerted on a word police basis.

[R B Garr]

242. Thank you for the polite answer and for not obfuscating in a

passive/aggressive way to try and get posts hidden.

Part of the scam here is to feign confusion about what people are responding to get an obvious interaction so bastardized that they hope someone loses their shit so they can alert. This phony obfuscation goes on for days, and it's the same people over and over and over perpetuating the madness.

It just looks like you were trying to implicate me, but I didn't alert, so I was wondering who the "they" were you referenced.

Thank you, again.

[Violet_Crumble]

259. The only problem with yr 'theory' is that the only person I've seen alerts on is polly...

And both of them have been bogus alerts. From the, uh, interest expressed by a few DUers in this thread and another one I saw a while back about how many hides she has and time outs and stuff, it does appear that there's some itchy trigger fingers when it comes to alerting on her.

[R B Garr]

261. Link to who they are. Provide links and names to this "theory".

Link to your mumbo jumbo about her hides and timeouts and 'stuff'. She's had several timeouts for attacking people, that's just common knowledge, so again, this is just more DUH that goes with the feigned confusion scam.

U betcha.

[Violet_Crumble]

262. Have you thought about reading through this thread and seeing it for yrself?

When it comes to older threads, there was a whole bunch in this one http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026279986

I dunno. I see people in this thread who've had time outs for attacking people, yet I don't see people following them around going on about it. If they did, I'd view them the same as these ones I've mentioned - kind of stalky and harassing..

I'm not sure why you insist that I'm feigning confusion. I'm not...

[R B Garr]

265. Read polly's post 101 in this thread. It's just that simple.

She was the one following someone around. Two someone's, actually, who are also long-established and well-documented favorite targets. It's just that simple, so you must be feigning confusion.

So talk about "stalky and harassing." By your own standards, in this thread, post 101 that is stalky and harassing (your words, thank you, what a great description of that hostile attack by polly).

[Violet_Crumble]

267. I dunno. If I'd been caught using a sock-puppet, I'd avoid discussions about famous DU sock puppets.

People were talking about sockies. I don't know why you think that particular incident shouldn't be laughed about as well. If you see that and the other one that you've been shown many times isn't any attack at all as attacks, then you have a very low and inconsistent bar when it comes to attacks. In the thread I linked to, polly wasn't even in the thread until someone implied she was a sock puppet and then a swarm emerged.

No, if you read what I said again, I said that those who go around fixating on the number of hidden posts someone has and going on about time outs do come across as stalky and harassing. In a thread where people are reminiscing over infamous DU sockpuppets of the past, someone coming along and mentioning another one isn't stalky and harassing at all...

[R B Garr]

268. Link to where someone said polly was a sockpuppet.

LMAO, the obfuscation is really hilarious, you've got to admit. It's obvious you're not serious now.

[Violet_Crumble]

270. Do you know the difference between implied and said?

Implied is to hint without coming straight out and saying it

Saying it goes along the lines of 'so and so is a sock puppet'.

I used the former, not the latter.

[R B Garr]

271. Link to it. Show where your confusion about that exchange began.

Show where the implication was.

edit to change a word in the reply title.

[Violet_Crumble]

274. I'm not confused. I've told you that quite a few times now...

And, no. When participating in a thread where there's already been a few bogus alerts posted, I'm not taking the risk of being alerted on for a call-out by linking to any individual's posts in another thread. Sorry.

[polly7]

275. Ignore that strangeness.

At some point, it just turns into white noise ....... the kind that makes your brain hurt.

[R B Garr]

282. You said polly was accused of being a sockpuppet in this thread.

Link to where that happened.

[polly7]

278. They were joking about them here.

I laughed as well at my first personal experience dealing with one ... at first it had me scratching my head wondering wtf they were trying to do, schooling me with both identitites, then wondering WHY anyone would choose to do it in the first place. Seems strange that they're allowed to mock others but I'm the bad person for mentioning their own, but par. Oh well ....... the feigned outrage still won't stop me from mentioning it if it comes up again.

[Violet_Crumble]

279. I encountered one in the I/P forum years ago...

There was one called coastie for truth who magically was present at every important event of the 20th century and had insider knowledge. And his alter-ego Radio Rick would appear in the same thread and not only would he use the two accounts to argue with other DUers, he'd also use both to talk to himself, along the lines of: Sockie1: Sockie2, I agree with you! You are the smartest person at DU!' Sockie 2: No, Sockie1, yr the most smartest and awesome person at DU. I lurv you!'

I'm off to bed now. I'm going to dream of scams and obfuscation and disingenuous things!

[polly7]

280. That would have been funny to watch!

It makes you wonder what on earth is going on with them they'd spend so much time with really juvenile actions.

Don't dream of the drama created here, you'll wake up with a headache. Puppies, colts, water-skiing (or is it too cold for that there right now?), softball - I dreamed last night our tournament team was supposed to play in Estevan - we drove and drove, made many turns, drove some more ..... and missed it - it pissed me off so much I woke up.

Goodnight!

[polly7]

272. LOL!

Yeah, that was something, lol. They had their own creepy, stalky thread they could say anything they wanted. Most pathetic thing I've seen here yet, apart from what they did to the host of the feminist group - that was nauseating. But .......... don't dare reply to a post of theirs - it's horrible, terrible!

I'll still reply to whoever and whatever the fuck I feel like.

Morning/night, Violet!

[Ruby the Liberal]

293. I don't try to get people's posts hidden

In fact, unless it is outright trollery, I rarely vote to hide anything. Life is just too short to get upset about a few pixels on a screen.

[Sissyk]

172. FYI - almost a lock out.

On Mon May 11, 2015, 10:50 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Nah ....... calling out a dishonest post isn't 'attacking' anyone,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6655098

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This member does like to insult other Du'ers using name calling. Rude and over the top. There is nothing "dishonest" about the original comment. To suggest a poster is lying, is a snowflake is rude. Then to call another poster incoherent and suggest a simple sentence is a rant is over the top. Civility is a challenge for Polly7.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon May 11, 2015, 11:03 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerting is a challenge for RB Garr, I see. If you are going to stalk Polly (which this thread makes obvious), you need to pick a post that is disruptive and not insult her in your alert message. Grow up!
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is a fine response to someone who's trolling the thread.

After reading this back and forth and doing some research, I do hope MIRT and/or the admins are keeping an eye on R B Garr. Smells like a caver to me. Thanks alerter for bringing them to our attention.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Try to argue like adults,crap like this might as well be posted on Drudge or Brietbart.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[polly7]

176. Interesting, thank you! : - ) nt.

[R B Garr]

184. That is hilarious. I've alerted ONE time, just a couple months ago.

With a 5-2 hide. One time.

[CreekDog]

219. No, I'm not keeping an eye on that person

Nice try though!

[polly7]

221. Huh? nt.

[R B Garr]

235. Thanks. And the posts are numbered so it's not hard to see who came back

from a time-out and started attacking again for no reason whatsoever. In fact, one of the jurors sounds like a little projection going on there, lol.

You rock, Creekdog!

[polly7]

163. LOL!!!!!

This is the first thread in many, many months I've even responded to one of her posts - I usually ignore most, but seeing how she claimed the right to alter a quote to use as some sort of ammo - how dare a man order his wife not to open the door (minus the rest of the sentence that actually makes his point) - we're all supposed to be outraged!!!

Sorry, when I see blatant dishonest crap, I call it out - no matter who does it. If you have a problem with that - tough shit.

[cwydro]

169. ...

[R B Garr]

182. LOL!!! You have never ignored my posts.

Nothing you say is credible. That's hilarious.

[polly7]

223. Whoops!

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[R B Garr]

224. Uh huh. There you go ignoring me again, lol.

It's been almost 7 hours since the last post, but I guess this graphic was REALLY important to you.

You have a great evening!

[polly7]

225. Uhhhhhhhhhhh ......... I wasn't talking about 'you'. nt.

[R B Garr]

230. lol, of course not.

[polly7]

231. Exactly. Go back and read.

[R B Garr]

232. I read that you always ignore me.

But that's not true. Here you are again "ignoring" me.

[polly7]

233. I've already told you I wasn't talking about you.

If you read it, it's more than obvious, but why you're choosing to make it about you is kinda weird.

[Aerows]

36. I would call an attorney (you don't need to have on retainer)

for this. Explain what is happening, and if they will take your case due to you being deprived of your fundamental right of health and safety in your domicile. The ability to sleep, and privacy are included in that.

The reason I say get a lawyer is because they will show that you mean business. I'd put up with that exactly as long as it took to get to a phone. They are threatening you and your wife.

[ScreamingMeemie]

40. They don't "own" the door, and I would consult an attorney if they are telling you this.

Unless you are not actually in a condo, but in more a co-op situation, condos have walls-in liability with exterior doors being "limited commons." This means you have a say over what is installed. Doors are not common property of the condominium complex, unless you have a landing with 2 units and then an exterior door.

This doesn't make any sense to me, but I'm going to guess you haven't really looked at your deed.

[tammywammy]

42. I'd say this assessment is correct based on previous posts about the condo

I'm going to guess you haven't really looked at your deed.

[diabeticman]

56. There are 4 condos in the building. Lots of people think it is an apartment complex.

You open the security door and you see a small entrance. Stairs leading up to 2 units ( ours is one of the upper ones.) To the left and right are the doors for the first condos

[Aerows]

41. I'm sure they probably have

legal clinics in your area. If you can get an attorney, you can nip it in the bud before it gets worse.

[diabeticman]

45. I am seeing we are going to have too.

[pnwmom]

82. I doubt the police would break down the door because of a noise complaint.

Especially when all they found was a quiet condo.

So if the police stood out there, knocking and knocking on the door, that could even be more disturbing to the complaining neighbor.

[Aerows]

83. I can only go by

what the OP said. I advised an attorney. Don't know enough facts to offer any better advice than that.

[PasadenaTrudy]

50. This is what she needs to say...

From Breaking Bad..

[Shrike47]

54. I would talk to the condo board, with a letter. I would consider calling the downstairs neighbor

any time someone knocked on the door in the middle of the night. 'Did you call the police again? There's someone knocking on the door.'. If they didn't, it would wake them up, which would be good.

[Jesus Malverde]

61. How about YOU answer the door?

[diabeticman]

62. I was at work. I work the midnight shift.

[Liberal_in_LA]

67. no

[alcibiades_mystery]

70. ...

I give this guy points for creativity.

"the sheets got wrapped around her legs so she did do couple hop steps to keep from falling..."

This is expert level.

[SMC22307]

84. And knocking on the door in the amount of time it takes a woman to pee...

and get back in bed.

is right.

[alcibiades_mystery]

87. I especially like how the cops told her to walk more softly!

That was a nice touch.



I usually just ignore these posts now, but I knew this one would be a classic just from the title.

[SMC22307]

91. And carry a big stick?

It must be some sort of exercise in reinforcing beliefs that "liberals" are either easily-duped moonbat suckers or hypocritical big, bad meanies.

Damn, I want a copy of the condo covenants ... cats, peep holes, deadbolts, oh my!

[alcibiades_mystery]

92. It's not ideological at all...it's straight con game

You might notice the parallelism with another supposed hard-luck case, but that one has already started to monetize. The need for a cat. The relationship with the dog. The meany neighbors. The slumlord. The wife's family. The person's family. Not surprisingly, both based in PA (probably real). The whole thing is a sham. No doubt this person has dozens of these stories and personas circulating on various forums, pulling a little here, a little there.

It's the same con, just with variations. I give it maybe six months before this one starts to want to monetize. The crisis. The GoFundMe. Oh, how heartless! people will scream when anyone with a lick of sense calls foul. The other one will be tapped out by then, and this one will have built up just enough history and "credibility."

Whatever. A fool and his or her money is soon parted. I just jump in for the entertainment value. The writing is particularly funny.

[cwydro]

107. I think the other case is already tapped out.

I'm predicting another thread about that one before the end of the month lol.

[KittyWampus]

115. Ah, the other case already found their knight in shining armor though.

[cwydro]

130. There were two knights, I think, right?

One a member of DU who amazingly turned up just in time!

[alphafemale]

173. Witch one would that be?

Fools and their money.

[cwydro]

179. Umm...

[R B Garr]

186. What's so funny about someone asking for help from this community?

[cwydro]

187. Lol.

Tired of picking on Polly? Come to pick a fight with someone else?

Take it elsewhere; I'm not playing that game.

[R B Garr]

189. So no answer as to why you're picking on someone in need, yet you

agreed with polly, which was just an attack on another poster here in this thread (which I responded to...).

Yes, LOL is right. Have a great day.

[cwydro]

191. Seven jurors disagreed with you and your alert.

You have a wonderful day too.

[R B Garr]

197. Except I didn't alert, so that's not a credible response, BUT

I do agree it gets old seeing the same people being picked on over and over and over for NO good reason. No good reason, whatsoever, as seen in this thread when someone back from a lengthy timeout for, of all things, dissing The Magistrate-- and then started attacking someone about an issue from TWO fucking years ago --well, I just wanted to point it out. I'll apologize for that.


God Bless America! The good ol' U.S. of A.

[ScreamingMeemie]

216. "Fools and their money..."

Exactly... "theirs" and not "ours" to worry so much about.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

133. Sports is my other passion

I post on another board with a regular group of posters. The welfare state came up and there were the inevitable freeloader comments. One of the regulars said that he was forced onto some welfare benefits because he has a sick kid...That opened a lot of eyes...Any way the board took up a collection for him without his knowledge.


All i will say is I find these posts interesting.

[SammyWinstonJack]

199. GoFundMe=eBeggars at times. Some are valid, some are not.

[REP]

205. Yup.

The long con. They'll need help to get out of this condo. Desperately.

[SMC22307]

229. Ah, gofundme... didn't think of that.

I had a post hidden in the threatening neighbors tale from France; decided to stay out of the threatening landlord from PA threads.

[underahedgerow]

80. Yanno, I'd be grateful for cops that responded so quickly to a request to check on the welfare of

someone I cared about. What IF she had fallen and gashed the heck out of her head and was lying bleeding out on the floor? Or what if some asshats had broken in and were holding someone you loved against their will -- or far, far worse?

Rather than making the cops waste their time waiting around, disturbing everyone else, causing a commotion and writing reports, etc, etc, etc.

And for what it's worth, it's better to ask forgiveness than permission. Install the effing peephole, smallest, least intrusive one you can find. Let THEM tell you that you can't do it and let THEM pay the bills to the lawyer for the letters that might follow. Do the same thing for the damn cat. Just get the cat and tell them to sod off. If someone else in the building has a cat, tell them to send a letter and hire their own damn lawyer and you'll see them in court.

Fercryinoutloud just do what you want. You're not saving lives here. It's a cat and a peep hole. Keep it clean, sanitary and quiet and no one else will ever know.

[alphafemale]

85. Not this drama shit storm again.

Alas, they are being oppressed.

[alcibiades_mystery]

90. On the bright side, they own a condo now

Movin' on up!

[KittyWampus]

117. Did you notice the wife has x-ray vision? They don't have a peep hole

The cop doesn't ever identify himself, but she knows it's a cop cause she can see his uniform.

[SammyWinstonJack]

200. ROFL.

[ohheckyeah]

96. Why not

just Google it?

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&source=android-browser&hl=en-US&q=do+you+have+to+answer+when+the+police+knock

[Violet_Crumble]

102. This link does a better job...

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Does+my+wife+have+to+answer+the+door+when+the+police+knock%3F

[ohheckyeah]

103. agree

[LexVegas]

106. Install a screen door. Leave the "Condo's door" open. nt.

[Phentex]

109. Yes of course she has to!

It would be rude otherwise. Also, what if it was someone who needed emergency help? Regardless of the time, she should always answer the door.

[KittyWampus]

122. LOL!

classic.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

127. One time I was at my friend's apartment in Daytona Beach back in the 80s

Those were the days... Any way he had these Klipsch speakers that he just bought and had turned them up to god knows what levels... He went out for a moment... I hear a knock on the door...It's a cop; a young black guy. He was super polite. He asks me nicely to turn it down which I do... I didn't realize my friend had his bong on his coffee table, right in clear view... He had to have seen it...

[Capt. Obvious]

132. Slowly I turned....step by step... inch by inch

[DemocratSinceBirth]

155. You're bad

[betsuni]

135. Knock knock

Who's there?
Police.
Police who?
Police walk softly.

[Phentex]

137. OMG!

[alcibiades_mystery]

142. Gahahaha

Perfect!

[pinboy3niner]

201. DUzy!

Best reply in the whole thread!

[demmiblue]

211. Holy Hell...

that struck my funny bone!

[WinkyDink]

141. No-one "must" open their door. If the cops break it down for a litle noise, I'd say they'd have a

bit to answer for!

[cwydro]

158. Install a chain lock.

No one will even know you've done it, and that will give you the option to see who is at the door.

[seabeyond]

160. that was the first and easiest solution, imo. nt

[AngryOldDem]

159. Can you just move to a more friendly place?

Why do you constantly put up with this shit if it's so obviously affecting your wife?

And let me add to the chorus and say that no, you DON'T have to open your door to anyone. I, for one, don't. At least we still had that right, last time I looked.

Sounds like it's coming down to your condo or your wife's health.

[Sunlei]

167. yes, if police get a call they have to see the person, to make sure they are ok

[DemocratSinceBirth]

175. ...

[cherokeeprogressive]

180. The solution is simpler than it seems.

Tell your wife to untangle her feet from the sheets BEFORE she puts her feet on the floor. This is guaranteed to make the pounding noise go away.

[cwydro]

185. This

is very sensible!

[alphafemale]

217. He knows all these details then we find out he wasn't even there.

She could have been doing jumping jacks or pound on the floor with a hammer for all he knows.

If the story was not complete fiction that is.

[LisaL]

250. OMG.

[PasadenaTrudy]

190. I think you should stick to the Lounge

GD brings out the ugly in people. I'm sure it has in me at times, too, and I don't like it. Good luck with your condo issues!

[steve2470]

228. sorry DB, cannot resist this any more....

[pinboy3niner]

238. For the definitive answer let's go now to Sir Paul...

Someone's knockin' at the door
Somebody's ringin' the bell
Someone's knockin' at the door
Somebody's ringin' the bell
Do me a favor, open the door and let 'em in

[miyazaki]

243. wasted ten minutes of my life on this thread

how does this happen?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

287. because you read very fast

I wasted fifteen.

[NCTraveler]

256. Here you go.

1) Of course your wife doesn't have to answer the door.
2) Tell her to untangle her legs before getting out of bed. Twisted ankles, broken bones, or a concussion really suck.
3) Write the association. Tell them in no uncertain terms to install a dead bolt and peep hole in THEIR door. Explain the situation with the security gating. CC your lawyer. They should do so quickly or tell you acceptable brands/types to use. No association would ever assume liability over something so small. It really doesn't make any sense.
4) Call the cops on your neighbors for noise. Same thing they have done to you.
5) Move. Some people simply aren't made for condo/apartment living. You are one of them. It isn't a bad thing. I couldn't do it either.

[ScreamingMeemie]

257. Holy Crap...Did this thread become Mean Girls 2 or what?

[MicaelS]

264. My advice for what is is worth.

Your residing at this location seems to be one problem after another. Rather than come to us for help, I urge you find a professional who can assist you.

Hire an attorney. If you can't afford one call Legal Aid. I am sure there is an attorney in your area who will do pro bono work. If nothing else you can sue the bastards for something, I am willing to bet.

In the interim, buy a journal / datebook. Start recording every incident. Date, time, all the details.