Duane Towler wrote in a message to Ronald Deal:
               [This message may get somewhat l-o-n-g...]
Duane,
  Please allow me to add my two cent's worth to this exchange between
  you and Ronald.  Not that he needs my help in defending his position
  mind you, but I feel that my comments may be warranted.
DT> Ok maybe the call waiting won't knock this off.  First off I take
DT> offense to being told to keep my mouth shut and all the other rude
DT> comments that you posted.
If you have a problem with what someone says in a message that is directed at 
you, please handle it one of two ways...
   1) Discuss the matter with that individual via Netmail and come to
   some peaceful solution, even if that means you have to agree to
   disagree.
   2) Bring the matter up with this echo's moderator via Netmail.  But
   be ready to substantiate your claim(s) that "offensive" language,
   names, etc. were used and make sure you include the date/time of the
   message(s) that you have heartburn over so that the moderator can
   verify what was really said by whom.
As for being told to keep your mouth shut, if you should start posting 
information that might endanger someone's chances of finding their b-family 
either now or in the future, you will not have to worry about Ronald telling 
you to keep your mouth shut.  The moderator will tell you!  And since he is 
an adoptee and *-is-* still searching for some of his b-family members, he 
takes that stuff very seriously - if you get my drift...
DT> It was not I that put the books in the Library and it was
DT> not I that gave the people the Freedom of Information Act.
Just in case you haven't bothered to read the FOIA lately, it applies to 
Federal institutions and government entities.  Not private businesses or 
agencies.  Catholic Social Services is NOT affected by nor do they have to 
comply with a FOIA request.  Hospitals also do not have to comply. Nor do 
lawyer's offices.
DT> If a birth parent does not want to be found then
DT> there are sealed adoptions.
Up until a few (5 - 10) years ago, almost ALL adoptions were closed and 
involved sealed records.  And most still are closed with sealed records. And 
it is not the b-parent(s) that request that the records be sealed, but the 
a-parents and/or the courts or social workers.
DT> But if that person had made it a point
DT> that it did not matter if the adoptee searched then why not use the
DT> avenues that are given to you she is just telling people that they
DT> are out there (MORE POWER TO HER).
Again, it is generally not the b-mother that requests that the records be 
sealed, but the a-parents who don't want to worry about the b-parents 
suddenly showing up on their door step to see how their child is doing.
DT> I will not be moderated by you and
DT> if it become part of the rules in this echo that the info can't be
DT> posted in this area then God save us all I thought that is what this
DT> echo was about.
Oh, you don't have to worry about Ronald trying to "moderate" you...this 
echo's moderator is more than capable of handling that task.  And it 
shouldn't come to the point of the moderator having to step into this 
discussion and tell someone to cool it.  One would think that someone that is 
fairly new to this echo would listen to those who have been here for some 
time and would heed their sage advice.  You see, we have been down the path 
several times and in a lot of cases do not like what we've seen when it comes 
to information that used to be easily (well somewhat easily) available 
suddenly become impossible to get at.  And all because someone feels that 
he/she has a right to shoot their mouth off about whatever they want 
regardless of what anyone tries to tell him/her.
As for this echo's rules being changed to keep search information from being 
posted in the echo will not happen.  At least I hadn't thought that it would 
be necessary - yet...  To quote an often used phrase from the original Star 
Trek series - "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one."  Please 
keep that in mind.  And I am referring to you as the one and your need to 
post information that could jepordize MY (or someone else's) chances of 
finding a b-family member will not be tolerated.  I have helped too many 
people find the person they were searching for to allow someone who wants to 
get up on his/her soap box ruin that.  I have had the pleasure of telling a 
b-mother that I had found the daughter she had relinquished for adoption and 
had been trying to find for several years.a  I have also had the pleasure of 
telling an adoptee that I had located her b-father whom she had been 
searching for for 4 years.  The genuine outpouring of emotions and thanks 
that one receives in those all too rare instances must be experienced to be 
truely appreciated.  And to allow someone to wreck the possibility of helping 
someone else just because he/she *-thinks-* they have a right to post what 
they want to just will not happen.
FWIW, you are too blind and/or nieve to realize the damage that you can do by 
posting the wrong thing in this or any other public forum.  The FOIA doesn't 
mean squat when it comes to obtaining information in most adoption searches.
DT> But if you don't want the info then don't read the
DT> message as far as I am concerned.
The problem is NOT with whether Ronald or I or anyone else in this echo 
doesn't want the information that was posted.  The problem is that there are 
those who are lurking (reading but never posting which would give away their 
presence) in this echo that can/will/have used information posted in this 
echo to try to insure that what information IS available becomes unavailable. 
 And they WILL read your message(s) and then WE will all loose...
DT> Or if you would like to ask the
DT> real moderator to please cut the feed to the BBS that I am on.
Again, Ronald doesn't need to ask the real moderator to cut your feed. The 
moderator reads every message posted in this echo and if any feed cuts are 
deemed necessary, they will happen.
DT> I am not going till fill the post with foul language even though I would
DT> like to I will just say that if you want to stay closed minded then
DT> so be it.  If you want to keep the info from getting out then you Sir
DT> are just as bad as the Yah Hoos that want censorship in our
DT> schools.
The problem here is that YOU are unable to see the possible damage that can 
be done (or has been done) by those types of postings.  And those that try to 
nudge you to "stiffle" get ridiculed and/or told off.
DT> End of discussion.
     Make it so!!
DT> But like I said if the moderator feels that I am wrong an you still want
DT> to press the issue please feel free to have the feed cut.
Ronald does not have to "press the issue" with the moderator in order for a 
feed cut to be requested.  The moderator reads every message that is posted 
in this echo and posts very frequently - though not always using his 
"Moderator" signature block.  And I advise you to keep in mind that when you 
tell someone off in the echo, that person might just be the moderator...
Michael Kirst
f/k/a Christopher Lee Backus
Sysop of The Noble House BBS
--- timEd/386 1.10+
---------------