Posted by Harry [NR] on 3/15/05 4:53pm
Msg #25622
Offensive Posts
This is a notice to dispense with the offensive posts. Offensive posts include, but are not limited to:
a) Posts containing overt or veiled bigotry, bias or sexism. We have received numerous complaints in connection with messages falling under this category. Take it somewhere else, keep it at home, or change your outlook on life.
b) Abusive posts. Stop the personal attacks and tone down the callous criticism. Please stop jumping on people for asking naïve questions; when reminding other posters of netiquette, be polite and sensitive (not everyone knows TYPING IN ALL CAPS is poor netiquette); recognize that not everyone has come from the same educational or ethnic background as you and expect some variance in English, grammar and usage, etc. In short, if it appears someone is making an earnest attempt to actually learn something or to be helpful and you are inclined to attack them, not responding at all may be a better choice.
c) Advertising yourself.
Failure to adhere to these guidelines may result in:
a) The disabling of your notary profile,
b) The black-listing of your notary profile, or
c) Complete restriction / lack of access to our site.
Occasional light political humor and off-topic jokes are still welcome.
Harry Shoemaker
Notary Rotary, Inc.
|
Reply by Mary Pierce on 3/15/05 5:06pm
Msg #25626
Thank you!!!!
|
Reply by Loretta Reed on 3/15/05 7:58pm
Msg #25668
I read this site regularly and I am proud that we have had the administration take a stand.
|
Reply by asigner on 3/15/05 5:08pm
Msg #25627
sorry harry
|
Reply by Mysti_FL on 3/15/05 5:13pm
Msg #25628
Finally! Thank you so much Mr. Shoemaker!
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 5:23pm
Msg #25630
Re: Thank you. n/m
|
Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 3/15/05 5:29pm
Msg #25632
Since You've Brought the Topic...
...up for discussion, Harry, I'd like to ask a question for edification purposes. Under your "Failure to adhere to these guidelines" heading you list under (c) "Complete restriction/lack of access to our site." How will that be enforced under the open format the forum now operates in? There's no current "signing in" to your forum which would allow you that capability. You'll still have the same anonymous posters & pseudo name individuals who can & will flame with impunity. Am I correct in my assumption or have you figured out a way to restrict them that I'm not aware of?
|
Reply by Harry [NR] on 3/15/05 5:58pm
Msg #25641
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
Dennis -
Thanks for asking.
Broad-based IP address restrictions. For example, we have received at least five off-line complaints related to a single user in the eastern United States. That user is accessing our site from dynamic IP addresses that are usually from one of two Class B address blocks on the Verizon network and generally on the same Class C (the first three octets of the IP) within those Class B's.
A simple analysis shows that, if it came down to it, blocking those entire Class B's would only affect approximately 3 known users. Now, if the user in question had another means to access the Internet - say, an AOL dial-up account - we could also conceivably identify and block relevant IP's from the allocation pool typically used to provision the dynamic addresses on that network. Of course, in some cases, the IP's are in huge ranges and it would be difficult. Often, however, they are in close relation for specific geographic regions, meaning it could be possible.
Finally, in addition to profile restrictions, we are considering the following "business" approaches to address abuse:
1) No more anonymous posts,
2) Validation of all forums-eligible accounts,
3) A peer ratings system (which would build a composite rating by notary, visible to signing agencies and the like), and
4) Delegation / assignment of forum moderator privileges to responsible users.
Really, though, truth be told, I would rather spend my time working on our advertising strategy, new search and work order features, etc. Unfortunately, the off-line complaints related to our free forum have reached a nuisance level and are now distracting me.
Harry
Notary Rotary, Inc.
|
Reply by Ernest_CT on 3/15/05 6:23pm
Msg #25648
Re: Security works best ...
... when the details of its implementation are not revealed.
We hope that your statements of possible repercussions help keep posting civil. Thank you for a great Site!
|
Reply by Stephen/VA on 3/15/05 6:35pm
Msg #25652
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
Harry, this forum is a big asset I would think. In my opinion, optimizing it would definitely be in your best interest.
|
Reply by Ernest_CT on 3/15/05 6:40pm
Msg #25655
And in the interest of all notaries! n/m
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 12:42pm
Msg #25818
Stephen...
http://paul.merton.ox.ac.uk/computing/mailing-lists.html
Thanks for supplying the above link. Your posting of the above was timely, wasn't it? I think we are about to round the corner to #7.
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 3/15/05 8:29pm
Msg #25672
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
I defnintely agree that you should get rid of the anonymous option. Personally I think you should take it a step further and only allow logged in users to access the forum. Every other message board I've ever been on operates that way and I think it would cut down on the clutter and confusion on this board if we all had to use the same screenname every time we post.
The peer ratings system seems odd to me though. Since most of us only know each other through our interactions on this board, what exactly would we be rating?
For example, I very much like Brenda TX and from reading her posts I can assume that she knows what she's doing on the job. But I really have no idea how she works having never worked with her, and the only source of information I have about her is herself, which is hardly the most objective source. And I can't see how my opinion of how she interacts with me on this board could or should be of any value to signing services.
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/15/05 10:05pm
Msg #25687
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
Thank you, CaliN. I like you too.
|
Reply by Harry [NR] on 3/15/05 10:58pm
Msg #25701
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
A composite peer rating would be one metric that would lend toward an overall competence rating, though it would not be weighted very heavily. The peer rating would obviously be soft, subjective or more human than other measures we're considering. With that said, even if the composite rating were not part of a greater aggregate, if you were a signing agency, would you seriously consider contracting someone considered an ass by their peers? Conversely, if a Notary Talk participant were rated 5/5 by 63 other notaries (on a helpfulness/likeability scale), wouldn't you feel a bit more secure having that notary represent your company? Anyway, that's just one idea... It's work in progress and my time is extremely limited.
Harry
Notary Rotary, Inc.
|
Reply by sue on 3/16/05 7:56am
Msg #25748
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
this is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. We constantly see posts by new people whining along the lines of 'don't reply if you don't have anything nice to say'. Well, some of the most experienced people don't always have something nice to say although they may know exactly what the hiring companies want done and know how to do it properly. This board is FILLED with new people. How in the world could you have someone with no experience rate someone with years and years of field experience. I see numerous 'helpful' posts filled with wrong info. To be helpful and well liked but supplying wrong info doesn't make you an asset to any company. You're WAY off the mark on this one.
As for the IPs, I am in PA. A Maryland notary shows up with the same IP address as I've got on occasion. I'm quite certain I don't use his computer and hopefully he's not crossing the Mason Dixon line while I'm out to use mine.
|
Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 3/16/05 8:41am
Msg #25752
I Don't Believe It'll Work Either, Sue...
...for there's no way I see to construct that kind of rating system to be fair & equitable. It'd end up being nothing more than a popularity contest & not a true measure of someone's worth to a signing company.
|
Reply by Harry [NR] on 3/16/05 11:41am
Msg #25807
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
Thank you for partially validating the notion of peer ratings. If you remember, the idea behind the concept was NOT to judge a notary's technical competence, but the soft skills. All things being equal (ceteris paribus to you economics majors and certain attorneys), I believe a signing agency, title or escrow company would prefer a notary with good interpersonal skills vs. a rock or a pit bull. Evidence of civilized discourse and a positive attitude on the forums, I believe, in the absence of other evidence, may be a good proxy.
Consider the following dialogue between a technically proficient signing agent and a borrower, for example:
Borrower: "So, you're telling me I can pull the plug on this whole deal so long as I do it before Tuesday at midnight?"
Signing Agent: "Yes."
Borrower: "But you said I had only three days to back out. Wouldn't that make it Monday at midnight?"
Signing Agent: "That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Why would you count Sunday when banks aren't open on Sunday and mail isn't delivered on Sunday?"
Borrower: "Oh." [Slumps into chair.]
Technical competence would be measured by a number of other things and would weigh heavily on a larger "signing agent" score:
- Exam performance
- Profile comments
- Company-to-notary ratings (agencies rating notaries based on actual performance)
Again, it's all work in progress and I haven't had time to work of late.
Harry
Notary Rotary, Inc.
|
Reply by ColleenCA on 3/16/05 12:06pm
Msg #25812
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...Harry you are so right
It is always better to use kindness then to be a pit bull. It is not necessary to answer other posts with rudness. If you know the answer to the subject matter then answer in a professional and kind way. If not, then just don't bother answering. It's that simple. Thanks again.
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/16/05 12:12pm
Msg #25813
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
Definition of sinking feeling: Being me, and being told that other signing agents may be publicly judging me based on my personality.
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 12:27pm
Msg #25816
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
It's apparent to me that HS is a thoughtful person who will not launch a plan for his membership to be able to destroy one another.
But, I can definitely see why you would worry having just called me fractious. On the other hand, I fear if others here knew the peevish real "me" I would also quake. Please do not tell about the time I let all the air out of your tires...or the paint ball incident...or the Valentine ExLax. I am really sorry this time. Really.
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 3/16/05 1:05pm
Msg #25820
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
Your example assumes that the way we talk to each other in this forum is the same way we talk to our clients. And that is simply not accurate.
When I make a "rude" post in here, it's usually because I expect the people in this profession to live up to some sort of professional standards and quality levels and I think that sometimes being blunt is the best way for me to get that message across. Their feelings are not my concern, their representing themselves as a professional on the same level as many of us in here when it's clear that they don't have the slightest clue what they're doing IS my concern. And it's not every question that I respond to this way, it's just the ones where people should already know better. And those are usually along the lines of "I have my first signing tomorrow, what's this acknowledgement thingy all about? I guess I'll learn as I go along because at least this way I'm making money while I'm doing it."
This forum is filled with posts that complain about how unprofessionally we are treated by some signing services and title companies, and it's also filled with posts that show the frightening levels of incompetence that many of our peers have, which reflects badly on all of us. Is it really surprising that so many signing services try to get away with the crap that they do when they know how many amatuers are in this industry? So yeah, I'll call people on certain things and hope that it imparts the importance of knowing what they're doing on at least a basic level before representing themselves as professional signing agents.
When I'm on a signing my concerns are that the borrower is happy with my service and that whoever I'm working for is happy with my service. My goal here is to get paid for the job that I'm doing and get future work from the same company. I also don't expect a borrower to have anywhere near the same level of understanding that I expect a fellow professional signing agent to have. So if a borrower asked me what this acknowledgement thingy was, of course I'm not going to respond to them in the same way I would respond to somebody on this forum asking. I'm trying to make a living, I'm not stupid enough to shoot myself in the foot while doing it.
The people in here who think I'm so awful and mean would probably be shocked to see me with a borrower on a signing. I've had many people thank me for being so NICE when I'm on signings. It's not uncommon for professionals in any field to have their professional face and their regular face, and sometimes they're quite different. Personally, I assume that Hugh doesn't talk about breasts and liquor when he's out on a signing, yet he talks about them all the time in here. We're seeing his personal face, his clients are seeing his professional face.
Unless we've seen each other in action on a signing, I don't think our rating each other on any sort of professional level is warranted at all. And I'm really surprised that the distinction isn't immediately more clear to you Harry.
|
Reply by sue on 3/17/05 9:19am
Msg #25969
oh my, someone actually understands (nm)
xx
|
Reply by Charm_AL on 3/17/05 9:32am
Msg #25970
Re: Since You've Brought the Topic...
sue - you wrote...
"As for the IPs, I am in PA. A Maryland notary shows up with the same IP address as I've got on occasion. I'm quite certain I don't use his computer and hopefully he's not crossing the Mason Dixon line while I'm out to use mine"
Is that right? lol
also, I think the people that feel they are disliked for whatever reasons don't want the rating system. Personally I like the idea of Companies rating us here.
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/17/05 10:36am
Msg #25990
Re: It should be the Companies that rate us ...
they are the ones who have used our services, know our ability and our competence.
|
Reply by Korey Humphreys on 3/15/05 5:36pm
Msg #25636
I'm no angel here... But thank you!!
Granted I've had my moments of child-like behavior, but as I've mentioned numerous times to Notary Rotary, "the dumbest thing someone, newbie or expirenced, can do is not ask a question they need to have answered!"
I've been the focus of a lot of recent "bashings" lately and I'm glad that they will soon stop. Now we can get back to the professional environment that once was.
|
Reply by MERRY on 3/15/05 5:40pm
Msg #25637
Thank you so much! As a "newbie" I have been a little put off by the "tone" that some regular posters take with questions from us. I understand, and do search the archives often, but do feel that keeping the questions (and answers) new and fresh is helpful to everyone. Also, it never hurts to repeat, repeat, repeat important "basic" Notary information.
|
Reply by Charm_AL on 3/15/05 5:47pm
Msg #25638
Thank You! I'm SO glad you mentioned advertising yourself, this has been a sore subject with me lately and you took care of getting it across, whereas I have failed 
You run a great site and I get a lot of business through NotaryRotary. I'm addicted. You are well respected out there in the signing community.
|
Reply by ColleenCA on 3/15/05 6:08pm
Msg #25643
Re: Offensive Posts- Thank you so much it was getting old
|
Reply by Becca/FL on 3/15/05 9:04pm
Msg #25678
Gee - guess I missed a lot here today, OR NOT.
Harry, I hope it was not my comment about being single & busty looking for a roomie in Vegas.
Are lawyer jokes still okay?
What do call a bunch a lawyers chained up on the bottom of the ocean?
Hugh - you know this one.
Thanks, Harry for keeping us focused and on track. A great many of us appreciate all of your efforts.
|
Reply by Me_in_CA on 3/15/05 10:12pm
Msg #25688
So, Harry, in Part B of your outline, "Offensive Posts", just how do you judge that? Many people here have been offended time and time again by CaliNotary's rude and disrespectful postings. Is he subjected to the same standards or does he get a free pass to insult people at his whim simply because he's grandfathered in?
If anyone should be looked at and considered for banishment, one should search his posts and reach each of them. He the most abusive of anyone else on this board. I hope this is done fairly. If so, CaliNotary is short for this board.
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 11:27pm
Msg #25707
At least we know Cali's posts are always from him -- something that can't be said with the alias posts.
|
Reply by Becca/FL on 3/15/05 11:50pm
Msg #25711
I agree, Carolyn.
At least we know where he is coming from. I do not find Cali's posts offensive, he posts some very good information. I do not skip over Cali's posts like I do some others.
|
Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 3/16/05 5:38am
Msg #25733
Since This Appears to be an Honest, Open Discussion...
...I respectfully disagree that "pseudo names" are acceptable. We still don't KNOW who CaliNotary is & I for one won't respond to any of his posts as a result. The analogy I prefer to use is that one wouldn't show up at a meeting of CA Notaries with a hood over their face to prevent others from knowing their identity, would they? How much conversation would others in the meeting be willing to share? My question is...why should it be acceptable to hide their face here? I've heard all the rationale about not letting signing services know their true name in order to protect what they say. I don't buy it. To my way of thinking if someone can't own up to whom they are, then what they have to say is immediately suspect in my book. I've always said there's a certain amount of false bravado on the Internet. People can & do say things on a message board they'd never dare say to someone's face. Hiding behind a pseudo name only creates another barrier to frank, honest dialogue. If this issue isn't addressed in some fashion or another by Harry (and with all he has on his plate I doubt that it will), I'll continue to ignore anyone who posts anonymously or under a false name.
|
Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 3/16/05 5:57am
Msg #25734
BTW...
...knowing the dot every "i" & cross every "t" mentality on this board (and there should be) I want to clarify my definition of "pseudo name" for our discussion here. A pseudo name would be one chosen by the poster to cloak their true identity without any means of further discovery. For example, Hugh posts under the pen name "HisHughness" which certainly isn't his real moniker. However Hugh also links his name (as I do as well) to his profile on the Notary Rotary web site from which another poster can derive any & all kinds of information about HisHughness.
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 8:46am
Msg #25753
Re: Since This Appears to be an Honest, Open Discussion...
Unfortunately, sometime during the past 5-6 weeks, it has become impossible to know *who* you are actually responding to because the forum has gone past the "Anonymous" poster to the alias poster(s) who include(s) first and last names and openly admit to using more than one signon, and then claim to not be all these different aliases because the IP addresses are different.
|
Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 3/16/05 8:59am
Msg #25755
That's Why I've Made the Suggestion to Harry...
...in some previous off-board dialogues that we require everyone to "sign in" when they post. Signing in could then tie you to your profile & would eliminate the current problem of not being able to identify the poster. I suppose someone could create a bogus profile, but then that would be easily verifiable & Harry could remove their information if proven to be fake.
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 3/16/05 1:27pm
Msg #25827
Re: Since This Appears to be an Honest, Open Discussion...
"We still don't KNOW who CaliNotary is & I for one won't respond to any of his posts as a result."
But you have no problem making snide, sometimes innacurate comments about me in other posts. I don't think that's necessarily a much higher road, but I'm sure you think it makes you more evolved somehow.
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/16/05 2:07pm
Msg #25841
Re: Since This Appears to be an Honest, Open Discussion...
I don't know whether knowing the true identity of someone is really necessary to this type of forum. My concern is that I be able to identity a poster >>in the context of this forum>>, so that I may judge his comments in light of his other contributions. I care not whether PAW is Paul Williamson of LaLaLand East, or Paul Wellblowmedown, also of Florida. What I want to know is whether this the same fellow who I have seen make excellent contributions in the past, so that I can judge what he has to say in the present. If, in support of the validity of his positions, he discloses personal or professional information, that's fine, but it isn't necessary. His previous posts have shown him to be a really asset here.
|
Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 3/16/05 2:24pm
Msg #25845
This Isn't the First...
...nor will it be the last time you & I disagree on an issue, Hugh. Whether Harry makes the change to tie a poster to their profile is up to him...it's his forum to do with as he pleases. You've expressed your opinion & I've expressed mine. I'll continue to ignore those who cloak themselves on the message board in the manner I've already described. However I will respond to those who identify themselves & come to think of it...aren't you blessed in that regard?
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 4:21pm
Msg #25855
Re: Since This Appears to be an Honest, Open Discussion...
If it's an Anon, I don't know where they are and will not help as readily.
As long as someone has enough info to indicate a state, and a handle so I can look back and see their previous history or follow them/ignore them, and if Harry knows who they are, that's pretty much enough to satisfy my purposes in this forum.
When I want to know who someone is before I answer them, I say "email me."
If I want to tell them something without being public, I post "email me." And once I have their email I respect their privacy and keep it private.
Not revealing all of one's information to people can be a means for self-protection or mere personal preference.
For instance, my sister is so concerned about it that it nearly gives her the vapors to realize that I can be found online and thus she might be "found" in some obscure sense. Heaven forbid she finds out about Switchboard.com!
A few years back she thought I had given out her daughter's phone number to someone who gave it to someone so she called to give me a sisterly "what for."
"Uh...Wait! Sis, let us see who the culprit is...tune into the TAMU.edu website and Daughter's name into the search on the Student Directory...there you will find that your daughter is the one who has provided her unlisted number to the world at large. She's just too chicken to tell ya she's out there and loving' every minute of it!"
OK...going to drop off today's at UPS.
|
Reply by Harry [NR] on 3/16/05 12:19am
Msg #25719
Re: Offensive Posts (*Please Read*)
Please try to refrain from naming names/pointing fingers. It only incites more posts of the type I'm trying to curb. In short, though, no one is above the law or "grandfathered." In fact (here I'm going to disregard my own suggestion), there is a great irony here that only our staff (Traci and I) are in a position to appreciate, and it relates, at least partially, to CaliNotary. Let me explain...
[Untitled]
Glass Houses?
or
Where There's Smoke There's Fire?
or
My Glass House is on Fire?
-----------------------
The first series of complaints we received were connected to HisHughness and were centered around what were perceived as inappropriate comments. With each, the gist was the same: "Hugh is crass. I can't believe you allow this to continue. Please remove me from your site, as I cannot tolerate his lack of professionalism." This idea stands in stark contrast to what I believe is a popular sentiment on the board: to know him is to love him. Anyway, I let Hugh know of the concern off-line as I continued to contemplate the potential offensiveness of his vast and varied Hugh-isms, which I generally find entertaining. (Hugh, please don't take that as encouragement.)
Concurrently, we received a number - probably in the range of three to five - complaints about CaliNotary cruelty. Here is the essence: "I just became a notary and have been lurking on your board for a couple weeks now. I have read many prior posts and have searched for answers to my questions. However, I am terrified to post because of the viciousness some of your members display to others on a daily basis. When you started your site, was that really what you had hoped for? Needless to say, I am leaving the board and no longer wish to be a member of Notary Rotary." Yes, I believe CaliNotary has single-handedly driven off at least three members.
Here, my response to each individual (that I had time to respond to) was roughly the same: We simply do not have the time nor the inclination to police the message board. People are allowed their opinions and, frankly, many of the posts I've read that some consider hurtful, while pointed, simply state: Do your research before embarking on a new career; do not expect to have your livelihood handed to you on a silver platter by, of all people, your own competition! So, we again find two valid points at odds: a) Some people want too much for too little, and b) Some people are two shades meaner than they need to be. As I began to contemplate that...
The Korey complaints started rolling in. I don't know where it all started, but I did manage to find the thread Hugh began in defense of CaliNotary. I have since perused several other threads looking for evidence of homophobia (again, remember it is not my job to police), multiple identities and/or personalities, etc. What I found was a mix of seemingly sincere posts, a smattering of condescension, a couple insults and a bit of self promotion. In this time, I believe we received at least three private e-mails from at least two of the parties I've named in this post, each arguing or stating a different position.
You should be able to recognize the irony (or, perhaps, comedy) by now and I'm hoping you can understand our limited involvement. To make it more clear, for those of you who don't already know, Traci and I are pretty much responsible for ALL aspects of Notary Rotary and The Notary Shop:
-web site development
-graphics
-database development and administration
-programming
-product development
-customer service
-production
-order fulfillment
-vendor relationships
-legal issues
-accounting
-marketing
-writing bonds and EO policies
-strategy and direction
I don't mean to sound more important than we are, but we are literally 400 e-mails behind and trying to stay on top of a phone that rings every 6 minutes during normal business hours. When you consider this - and the fact that we can only work 70-80 hours per week each, while still maintaining some semblance of a home for our teenage children - it is a wonder we are able to address these issues at all.
Which brings me back to two important points:
1) As I stated at the beginning of this post and in answer to your question, no one is beyond reproach.
2) As I stated in my original post, the noise generated by these issues has reached a nuisance level and I'm to the point that I will invest the time to address it in order to minimize the distraction it's causing.
Of course, my hope is that everyone will respect our position and give us a break.
Harry Shoemaker
Notary Rotary, Inc.
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/16/05 12:34am
Msg #25721
Re: Offensive Posts (*Please Read*)
Okay, Harry, I get it, I get it. No more references to chests, hairy, voluptuous, or otherwise. I promise.
Does anyone know a widow who owns a liquor store, a bass boat, and a trust fund, and who looks really good without a girdle?
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 12:39am
Msg #25723
Re: Offensive Posts (*Please Read*)
What Harry, a gentleman as always, did not say is that I have multiple personality disorder.
I am not only BrendaTx, but I am also Hugh Nations, CaliNotary, and Korey Humphreys. On occasion, I am unsure of who I am and thus use the "Anonymous" tag. (My therapist has also insinuated that I could also be Art-MD, Loretta Reed and PAW-FL...but I cannot accept that yet. I fear it would shatter me.)
I am also in treatment for being a pathological liar.
I apologize for any confusion this has caused.
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/16/05 12:53am
Msg #25725
Re: Offensive Posts (*Please Read*)
Brenda finally admits:
***What Harry, a gentleman as always, did not say is that I have multiple personality disorder.***
I have always said that Brenda was one fractious woman. That is the right word, isn't it?
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 10:25am
Msg #25784
Re: Offensive Posts (*Please Read*)
HisHughness states: "I have always said that Brenda was one fractious woman. That is the right word, isn't it?"
---
Fractious: Definition: —adj.
1. refractory or unruly: a fractious animal that would not submit to the harness.
2. readily angered; peevish; irritable; quarrelsome: an incorrigibly fractious young man.
---
Hugh,
I am angry, peevish, and offended. A demerit will be issued instanter.
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/16/05 11:50am
Msg #25809
Re: Offensive Posts (*Please Read*)
Brenda notes that "fractious" means quarrelsome and peevish, not fractured or fractionary, as in a split personality, and that I obviously used the wrong word in referring to her. To which I respond, absolutely, Brenda. I'm not the sort of guy who would use one word that sounds like another just to sneak in a little gibe. Not me.
|
Reply by Cyndra_in_CA on 3/16/05 5:50pm
Msg #25870
Brenda! That was so funny! n/m
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/15/05 10:18pm
Msg #25690
Is it considered sexist, Harry, if I devote as much comment to hairy chests as I do to bosomy widows? Maybe I could just say I'm interested in a widow with a liquor store with a nice front? Or a widow with a bass boat with a prominent prow?
|
Reply by Tulsa_Prlgl on 3/15/05 11:41pm
Msg #25710
Thank you Harry.... and lol, thanks Hugh for the laugh!
|
Reply by John_NorCal on 3/16/05 12:11am
Msg #25716
Re: Offensive Posts - Let's stay on track for biz (n/m)
|
Reply by Dave_CA on 3/16/05 9:37am
Msg #25762
Re: Offensive Posts - & still allow some humor...N/M
|
Reply by Korey Humphreys on 3/16/05 10:01am
Msg #25772
Honestly,,, please answer
I do get the occasional complaint *by the same two people* that I am advertising my services. I honestly don't know where I'm advertising. So, don't be critical here, please just explain to me where it is that I'm advertising so that I may change it.
By adding my website to direct somebody to the information is that advertising???? Seriously, I am confused on this one.
|
Reply by Anonymous on 3/16/05 10:12am
Msg #25780
Re: Honestly,,, please answer
You are advertising when you post your e-mail and website to the text of your message. That's what your profile is for which is linked to your signon name.
|
Reply by ColleenCA on 3/16/05 10:32am
Msg #25788
Re: Honestly,,, please answer
Why emails? I see people posting their email's all the time. In fact, one person from my area posted her email address, and we have been conversing daily. I don't consider that advertising. What does everyone else think?
|
Reply by Charm_AL on 3/16/05 10:36am
Msg #25789
Colleen...
giving or recieving an e-mail address is not advertising, but posting your website in your post is blatant advertising.
|
Reply by ColleenCA on 3/16/05 10:39am
Msg #25790
Re: Colleen...Charm AL
Yes, that's exactly my opinion too. That's why I was relating to Anom. that an email address should be ok. Website posting is blatant advertising.
|
Reply by Mary Pierce on 3/16/05 10:41am
Msg #25791
Re: Colleen...
I've seen quite a few posts on here that put a link to their website in their messages...not just Korey. Why is everyone bashing him for it?
|
Reply by Charm_AL on 3/16/05 10:53am
Msg #25796
Mary
I've seen a few here and there by notaries looking for advice/opinions or help in developing. I am not bashing him when I and others point out, and repeatedly I might add, the same explanation everytime. You just notice it more in his case because he repeats the offense constantly, then acts like he doesn't logically know what he doing wrong.
|
Reply by HisHughness on 3/16/05 12:04pm
Msg #25811
Re: Colleen...
Mary Pierce asks:
***I've seen quite a few posts on here that put a link to their website in their messages...not just Korey. Why is everyone bashing him for it?***
Many people indeed have linked to their website. Sometimes it is to ask for advice on changes, corrections or improvements. Sometimes, as in the case of Art offering downloadable loan document exemplars, the poster is simply trying to be helpful. I think the problem with most of Mr. Humphreys's posts involving such things as his website is manifold. Though I haven't read his posts for a while, my surmise from past posts is that the objections include such things as --
1) Suspicion engendered by any posts by that participant, based upon previous actions; and
2) The self-aggrandizing nature of many of the posts, which essentially have said, "Look at me. I'm out here doing this and I'm available."
It is important to remember that signing companies do sometimes read this forum, and if one is so minded, advertising your services on this forum is one way of reaching them, albeit a not very effective one.
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 10:53am
Msg #25795
Re: Honestly,,, please answer
When you use the board for your personal biz -- "please e-mail me, I have work for you, blah blah blah" then that is considered advertising, IMO.
|
Reply by Charm_AL on 3/16/05 10:55am
Msg #25797
true Carolyn, we just need to use common sense..n/m
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 11:02am
Msg #25800
Re: P.S.
Additionally, when you converse back and forth (either with yourself or a real person) re "please contact me because I can't reach you by phone, or your e-mails are kicked back and I have a job for you" could very well be construed as advertising and don't belong here.
|
Reply by Korey Humphreys on 3/16/05 2:33pm
Msg #25847
Kay... I seriously apologize then
I'm sorry! Truly sorry!!!
I became defensive in my posts because I really didn't know how I was advertising.
From here on it,,,,,, now that I no exactly what you think advertising is....... I won't be listing messages for one particular person and/or won't add my website address.
Sorry.
========
Korey
|
Reply by Happy_in_Fl on 3/16/05 4:47pm
Msg #25864
You have my Vote Harry!
Just renewed my Membership on NR for another year; ( and 3 1/2 months early!)
(Didn't even need a reminder)
Best site going! Lets all agree, to make it - and keep it that-a-way.
We do have a lot of Wonderful- Different- and "Knowledgeable" people who continue to offer their input, and Wisdom, to help each of us do a better job- and carve out a Living as Notaries.
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 7:53pm
Msg #25891
Re: Who is Kay? n/m
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 10:08pm
Msg #25915
Kay Theorem
If Okay = Kay, then Carolyn = Arolyn, while the sq. root of C = sq. root of A + sq. root of B.
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 10:24pm
Msg #25918
Re: Kay Theorem
And what's the name of the song where you remove the first letter of people's names?
|
Reply by BrendaTX on 3/17/05 12:10am
Msg #25928
Re: Kay Theorem
I don't know, but Hugh's a songwriter. Perhaps he can write one just for this purpose.
If you take the H off of Hugh, it's Ugh.
(That could be the first line.)
|
Reply by Charm_AL on 3/17/05 8:33am
Msg #25963
Carolyn
Shirley, Shirley, bo birley, banana fanna fo merely, fe fi fo merely - shirley!
LOL
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/17/05 10:39am
Msg #25991
Re: Thank you. n/m unless Brenda posts the whole song
|
Reply by Art_MD on 3/17/05 11:56am
Msg #26005
Re: song = "The name game" n/m
|
Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 10:50pm
Msg #25922
Re: Okey Dokey Brenda. n/m
|
Reply by Korey Humphreys on 3/16/05 10:37pm
Msg #25920
was trying to keep it short "kay" = okay 8-D n/m
|
