Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Personal Attacks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Soiled View Post
    And you follow her on to her threads. Your both seem to seek each other out, though frankly, offhand I think your by far the bigger stalker, however I could be wrong there. Every time you get shut down on one of her threads, you create a 'convo'. This one, or previously the 50/50 'debate'. These are obvious and thinly veiled attempts to carry on the conversation, where you make a couple comments to bait your target in, and then gleefully start in on it again.
    This thread was not a lure for her. Her case wasn't even brought up. It was about attacking personal characteristics of posters.

    Don't get me wrong ... I've even wrote on Angies thread that she seems like a good person and a good parent. We've even PM'd each other where I try and make sure that there a no hard feelings. My convo's are nothing like S&T attacks.

    I'm passionate about family law and I don't think that makes me a bad person. Want to know what frustrates me? Cases like this, where dad's been there a long time, and is only asking for a bit more access to be an equal parent .. and mom denies. This is why our court system is bogged down and I figure I'll try to promote change any way I can.

    Too bad there aren't many others like me. It is extremely surprising to me that there aren't more posters encouraging her to allow the minimal extra access and avoid the world war in the court room.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Soiled View Post
      And you follow her on to her threads. Your both seem to seek each other out, though frankly, offhand I think your by far the bigger stalker, however I could be wrong there. Every time you get shut down on one of her threads, you create a 'convo'. This one, or previously the 50/50 'debate'. These are obvious and thinly veiled attempts to carry on the conversation, where you make a couple comments to bait your target in, and then gleefully start in on it again.


      I have to agree with Soiled... I usually ready every thread but most times I skim through these posters threads because it gets annoying to read the same over and over again...

      LF- Ange doesn't agree with you. You repeating yourself over and over will not change her mind. When she asks a question stop bringing up old threads. Just stick to the topic at hand. It shouldn't be that hard. You don't have to insert yourself into every post she makes and try and point out her inconsistencies. Btw... she did admit to recording her children once and was told it was useless and she has since stopped. She learned from her mistake and has decided to redirect going forward. You're bringing up old new with that. Remember you made mistakes in the beginning as well and you also learned from them.

      Ange - stop defending yourself to the same people over and over, you don't need to. They are not judges and you don't have to explain yourself. That being said, remember this is a public form and you are going to get many people who like to stir the pot. You have to have big shoulders to navigate brought the pettiness and find the actual advice.

      I highly suggest you both use the ignore function so this forum stops being a platform for you two to bicker like school children.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #18
        Thanks Berner.

        "Recording" Vs "redirecting" was just an example of her inconsistencies. I won't point out the other 10 because it bother people.

        She wants to go in and start a court war over an extra day or 2 of access. I'm simply giving advice on how "not" to do it. Don't say he has psychological problems. Don't say she's withholding any additional access because of what he's done to her....don't talk about his new g/f being high maintenance and organizing his life....etc. This is pretty solid advice.

        Berner...I haven't "inserted" myself in every post. I haven't even been here for several months.
        Last edited by LovingFather32; 04-11-2017, 10:36 AM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
          She can ignore. Why doesn't she ignore. Instead She follows me around the forum. I think she may enjoy it.

          Your advice works both ways. You can ignore. You can avoid her posts. You gave your opinion in her initial posts. Then you have proceeded to continue to hammer her in separate posts asking new questions. Funny, you're a bit of an expert in hearsay comments with your ex but instead of simply answering, you had to go into the previous argument and hammer her on previous decisions. A simple "hearsay in affidavits is seen as x by judges" would have sufficed. Continuing into previous issues and statements was unnecessary. You're smarter than this!

          As for other posters attacking you, don't give them more fodder.

          The two of you are wrong and starting a thread to get people to defend your behaviour isn't really helpful. Move on.

          I say the same to Angie. Stop encouraging a useless argument that solves nothing. Agree to disagree. If neither of you like what the other has to say, stop responding. Its exhausting!

          Comment


          • #20
            To be frank... I don't think Angie's case is very strong anyways. She is easily baited and will be horrible on the stand.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by rockscan View Post
              Your advice works both ways. You can ignore. You can avoid her posts. You gave your opinion in her initial posts. Then you have proceeded to continue to hammer her in separate posts asking new questions. Funny, you're a bit of an expert in hearsay comments with your ex but instead of simply answering, you had to go into the previous argument and hammer her on previous decisions. A simple "hearsay in affidavits is seen as x by judges" would have sufficed. Continuing into previous issues and statements was unnecessary. You're smarter than this!

              As for other posters attacking you, don't give them more fodder.

              The two of you are wrong and starting a thread to get people to defend your behaviour isn't really helpful. Move on.

              I say the same to Angie. Stop encouraging a useless argument that solves nothing. Agree to disagree. If neither of you like what the other has to say, stop responding. Its exhausting!


              Agreed, I will ignore.


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Ange71727 View Post
                Agreed, I will ignore.
                I don't think it will happen. You are easily baited. Something you need to work on if you should ever hit the stand. A qualified barrister would have a field day with your need to be detailed.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                  Funny, you're a bit of an expert in hearsay comments with your ex but instead of simply answering, you had to go into the previous argument and hammer her on previous decisions.
                  I'll admit that I'm baffled by her case. Her kids deserve better than this high conflict court stuff over a measly few percentages of increase.

                  I have good intensions Rock....you know that. I'm not the bad guy starting arguments...sorry if that's all you see. I'm the good guy trying to encourage settlement outside of court over a rather small issue.

                  The two of you are wrong and starting a thread to get people to defend your behaviour isn't really helpful. Move on.
                  I started this thread to address personal attacks by S&T and nothing more. C'mon Rock..this wasn't a bait for her. She drops by to discuss her case...so I thought I would.

                  I'm starting to realize that she's going the high conflict, litigation route no matter what I say ..... but please don't hate on me for trying to encourage settlement...for the kids sake. That's doesn't make me bad and annoying.
                  Last edited by LovingFather32; 04-11-2017, 11:57 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Let it go. There is a judge who will decide the case. You dont need to.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                      Let it go. There is a judge who will decide the case. You dont need to.
                      Yea...my hope was that I might spark something in her to realize trying out an equal, shared parenting regime before WAR isn't the worst idea in the world.

                      I wasn't expecting this much kickback (strangely by not one father) but it is what it is. She wants to pull the kids into a dramatic, exhausting warzone over a little access increase.....so that's that. I just feel for the kids .. like I said...good intensions.
                      Last edited by LovingFather32; 04-11-2017, 12:24 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                        I wasn't expecting this much kickback (strangely by not one father) but it is what it is. She wants to pull the kids into a dramatic, exhausting warzone over a little access increase.....so that's that. I just feel for the kids .. like I said...good intensions.
                        For the record, I'm a father to three kids, and gave you some kickback, so nothing to do with gender here.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Soiled View Post
                          For the record, I'm a father to three kids, and gave you some kickback, so nothing to do with gender here.
                          Ahh yes..my bad. I actually really enjoy your posts. You've followed my threads for quite a while.

                          I agree that I can get passionate about disallowing equal parenting for crap reasons, although I'm surprised that more haven't discouraged high conflict court litigation over a little increase in access.

                          There are terrible parents out there (abusive, addictions, pops in and out of child's life, etc.). and not so terrible ones. He sounds like a not-so-terrible one....and he's been there, has a healthy environment. He's earned his right to parent equally in my opinion.

                          But I can see the poster is choosing to drag the kids, ex and finances through this stinky, swampy court system .... hey ... I tried.
                          Last edited by LovingFather32; 04-11-2017, 01:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
                            Turning peeps against you wasn't my motivation. I could care less about who's on what side. Usually it's boy vs girl here which is sad .. but whatever. Having 2 loving parents equally involved in your children's lives was. I see no good reason you wont allow that.
                            I shouldn't be chiming into this post but I ate my lunch too fast and have nothing better to do.

                            LF, I'm neutral. I never really read much of your threads because they were as long as the OJ trial and I have the attention span of a gnat. But you seem like a nice enough guy who, like many of us, have been beat up by the family law system. So I get your vexation.

                            But its actually not at all true that its usually male vs female on this site. Its usually women-hating-men vs everyone else....or non-working litigant vs everyone else....or woman-trying-to-unfairly-deny-access vs everyone else. The way this forum breaks down is FAR more complex than what you describe.

                            I'm female and never side with anyone based on gender.

                            You also seem to think you're the champion for fair access in parental rights and frankly, you came very late to that crusade. You're giving yourself credit where none is due because this site has been pro-equal parental access for as long as I've been here. I can't think of one regular poster who isn't for fair access unless there's valid reason for one parent not having it.

                            The issue that you're not comprehending is that you (and some of the other more extreme posters here), see everyone else's case only through the lens of your own experience. You think because you went through something with your ex...that you perceive as unfair...that every other case (and often every other woman) is like that. As such, I've had instances where I've posted...and because I'm female...I'm had women-haters jumping down my throat without even reading my posts properly. And no, I'm not referencing you...but I saw your posts to Ange in that vein.

                            This thread was not a lure for her. Her case wasn't even brought up. It was about attacking personal characteristics of posters.
                            Seriously?

                            The other thread was shut down and you weren't done. That's why you started this thread. That you titled it something different is irrelevant. If you want Ange to own her issues...own yours. You are a classic right-fighter on a crusade....which is why the length of some of your threads rival Tolstoy's War & Peace.

                            Personally, I agree with your basic premise. Based on what Ange posted, it sounds like fair access with her kid's father is reasonable....which is what I commented on her thread. But ultimately, if she's bringing up idiotic arguments for denying access, the court will see through that anyway. She may have valid evidence, for all I (or you) know, and if she does...the court will consider that also. All you can do is state your point and move along...clearly she believes she has a valid reason to deny more time.

                            The amount of fury you have over your own situation is poisoning your ability to see other situations as possibly different.

                            Try to remember that this is a living site and five years from now someone will be coming for advice and information. Getting into a four page argument off the topic of discussion is not helpful to that person searching for info.
                            I agree but there's also some entertainment value watching these posts sometimes. I just wish I had packed popcorn in my lunch bag.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
                              LF, I'm neutral. I never really read much of your threads because they were as long as the OJ trial and I have the attention span of a gnat. But you seem like a nice enough guy who, like many of us, have been beat up by the family law system. So I get your vexation.
                              Aww, thanks for your understanding.

                              You're giving yourself credit where none is due because this site has been pro-equal parental access for as long as I've been here.
                              Yet nobody is encouraging equal parenting in the case being discussed except for me.

                              Personally, I agree with your basic premise. Based on what Ange posted, it sounds like fair access with her kid's father is reasonable....which is what I commented on her thread. But ultimately, if she's bringing up idiotic arguments for denying access, the court will see through that anyway.
                              People are scared to agree with me. So thank you PH. Not that I need sidekicks but you're not one to join the swarm (neither am I) and I appreciate that.
                              I agree that the courts will see though her idiotic arguments. This is all I've been trying to say .. and you summed it up in one sentence without quoting her. I have to be more like you. :-)

                              The other thread was shut down and you weren't done. That's why you started this thread.
                              No, I started this thread because I don't enjoy my personal life being attacked by S&T. My education, my job with children, etc. This thread had nothing to do with Angie and to be frank I was surprised she stopped by. It was to try and stop S&T's attacks...not to go on with Angie...promise.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Both of you don't seem to recognize the triggering this subject is causing within your brains.

                                LF32.....this women's arguments are too much like your ex's. Let it go, point is/was made in the last thread. Proof was in your winning (eventually) over your ex's immoral stance and actions.

                                And my trigger, lady, get out of your ex's wallet.

                                And God Forbid you had cheated on your ex, then you would have Links on your case big time.

                                Just saying.

                                This site is addictive (I get drawn back every time my greedy ex does sometime that triggers me). I realize that is my problem, although she the one twisting the knife.

                                Like DTTE (who finally left after getting a g/f), some of you need to forget this site, move on (easy to say) and, stop reliving the f&@king horror that was your divorce.

                                Your reasons for staying have more to do with a proxy revenge than you know, IMHO.

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X