"I haven't read all the way throught the thread, but here's what I think"

LovingFather32 said:
I went to police next day to file missing persons

Got lawyer not too long after who tracked down her lawyer and served application

Went for emergency motion

I didnt wait for much.
Click to expand...

Not sure the missing person would be necessary, but be that as it may, that is simply my thinking. All told, it was probably a reactionary thing, and those things happen.

But mainly, I felt you did a decent job of acting and not reacting.

My comments to the point in this thread is where you, or anyone, have a question about a matter related to your case, it is almost always better to start another thread with that question. If people ask for information because they haven't read the history, they are likely to read the link if you provide one.
 
Straittohell said:
HammerDad, I've paraphrased pretty much all of that stuff, based on what has shown up on LF32s threads.

A few people have suggested that since it wasn't appropriate for the ex to do what she is doing, that she should simply be told to stop, and surely, she will. They also make sweeping statements like "surely you must have known something like this was coming, there is no way that someone would mislead you into thinking everything was fine and then just leave without notice."

I'm not kidding. That is partly what inspired me to start this thread. Poor LF32 has painstakingly explain on numerous occasions how everything went down, and yet, there are still people making statements demonstrating complete ignorance of what has been happening to him. That's pretty much what was behind my vent.
Click to expand...


There is no fixing stupid but duct tape helps keep it to a minimum:D
 
HammerDad said:
Not sure the missing person would be necessary, but be that as it may, that is simply my thinking. All told, it was probably a reactionary thing, and those things happen.

But mainly, I felt you did a decent job of acting and not reacting.

My comments to the point in this thread is where you, or anyone, have a question about a matter related to your case, it is almost always better to start another thread with that question. If people ask for information because they haven't read the history, they are likely to read the link if you provide one.
Click to expand...
Oh. Lol. Yea I agree. I should probably make my threads more topic-specific and limit the number of pgs.
 
I like the daily burn of the lf32 thread...it is getting huge but I find it interesting.

The only problem I see with it is there is no way I think someone could start from the top and read all the way through.

Both lf32 and I started reading WorkingDads posts and I can say I learned a lot from it. Although there were obviously long gaps in time between posts it was helpful to gleam some instruction from it. So where workingdads post didn't have enough running commentary, lf32 probably has too much for someone in the future to go through.

Not that it's a problem really...it's just a different flavor. I think lf32 digest might be helpful for future cases to fully appreciate all the emotional aspects of the "ride". It helped me read both lf32 and WD not just when they were cool but also when they were burning up :).

It helps to say...hey that's exactly how I feel...and then it helps you jettison that baggage faster I think.
 
If someone creates long, winding threads, the signal-to-noise ratio will inevitably start to drop. That's the risk you take when you tell long, very detailed stories that spin out over hundreds of pages. If you find that someone's post isn't as informative or helpful as it could be because that person isn't aware of details that were explained 87 pages ago, just skip over the post. You don't need to respond in order to set everyone straight. It's just one of the costs of posting on a free Internet forum frequented by interested amateurs.
 
stripes said:
If someone creates long, winding threads, the signal-to-noise ratio will inevitably start to drop. That's the risk you take when you tell long, very detailed stories that spin out over hundreds of pages. If you find that someone's post isn't as informative or helpful as it could be because that person isn't aware of details that were explained 87 pages ago, just skip over the post. You don't need to respond in order to set everyone straight. It's just one of the costs of posting on a free Internet forum frequented by interested amateurs.
Click to expand...

That's a fair account. It becomes tough to skip over when it's argued over 4-5 posts that I didnt do an EM .. or that I don't deserve unsupervised access. But I get your point.
 
I find if posters on here can't ascertain the particular facts of the scenario being presented by someone, they do try to offer the best general advice they can...for an anonymous online Internet forum.

It's practically impossible to follow some of the long-running threads on here. I know, I'm not going to wade through 15+ pages of a thread (or multiple threads), to try and make sure I'm up-to-date on someone's family law issue. Some people enjoy that...I do not.

I think it's really up to the original poster's to try and capture as much good info, concisely, as they can, to properly present their scenario, if they are looking for valuable responses...again, on an anonymous, online Internet forum.

I think poster's who need to rely on multiple long-running threads, to present their scenario, will have a harder time in court (if it comes to that), because it seems like they can't present well. Hopefully, they have a lawyer, who can. Are you going to comment to a judge, "gee, I already explained that in x document, page 255?"
 
It is nice to have "updates" though, on threads, so that is appreciated. I especially find it useful, when someone posts an update on their thread, to say "hey, here is my outcome" if anyone wanted to know.
 
dad2bandm, I think that is why this place is such a useful tool.... helping people cut through their own noise.

I totally understand what you're saying; my original bone was being picked with some of the folks who were lobbing advice that was ignorant of basic facts that had been made crystal clear by the original poster. As I said, it's fine if you can't read through an entire thread, but stating "I haven't read the entire thread but here's my advice anyway" has only added to the complexity of certain threads. If people don't have the time to follow something, that's perfectly fine, they just shouldn't be posting on that particular thread.

Just my humble opinion, of course.
 
dad2bandm said:
I find if posters on here can't ascertain the particular facts of the scenario being presented by someone, they do try to offer the best general advice they can...for an anonymous online Internet forum.

It's practically impossible to follow some of the long-running threads on here. I know, I'm not going to wade through 15+ pages of a thread (or multiple threads), to try and make sure I'm up-to-date on someone's family law issue. Some people enjoy that...I do not.

I think it's really up to the original poster's to try and capture as much good info, concisely, as they can, to properly present their scenario, if they are looking for valuable responses...again, on an anonymous, online Internet forum.

I think poster's who need to rely on multiple long-running threads, to present their scenario, will have a harder time in court (if it comes to that), because it seems like they can't present well. Hopefully, they have a lawyer, who can. Are you going to comment to a judge, "gee, I already explained that in x document, page 255?"
Click to expand...

Yes. If some of these threads were analogous to affidavits we'd be in trouble. Thank god for lawyers and thank god this is only a chat forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top