This is in response to Immy's blog where she elects me as her stalker. The fact remains that Immy responded to my SL Forum post on June 5th of this year - and I had not heard of her before. In that response she called me a liar and made a statement (that was later found out to be false) to discredit another poster.
Post # 242/Page 17
(Note that Immy chased me all the way up to post #737 in this thread)
I saw this fun thread about ‘What is Broadly Offensive to you’ and it had many replies – but I had not participated. Then that morning I saw a thread about child avatars and a nude beach. This was ‘jaw-dropping’ to me so I posted about it in the ‘Broadly Offensive’ thread.
Originally Posted by Lias Leandros
There was a thread in the Xstreet forums about a Mentor who runs a nude beach for child avatars (the thread was deleted this morning). The owner of the nude child beach actually responded to the thread saying there was nothing wrong with it (even after several forumites went over there and witnessed child avatars dancing nude with adult male avatars).
I find this child nude beach broadly offensive. The fact that it is run by a Linden Approved Mentor compounds the issue.
Now I thought that this would just be viewed and folks would continue posting their ideas of what was broadly offensive. I had not read the 15 pages before my post and had not seen Immy’s other postings about child avatars and sex.
Ageplay is not intrinsically sexual. It's merely depicting yourself with an appearance and behaviour inconsistent with your real age. (^_^)
Sexual Ageplay is not intrinsically rape. Rape roleplay is. Am I the ~ONLY~ one here who played "doctor" as a kid? (O.o)
Now if I had taken the time to read the 16 pages before what I posted, I probably would not have chosen to participate. Upon looking at Immy’s post and the others – the entire thing was fubar by then and I was not in the practice of involving myself in folk’s sex stuff.
But when Immy replied to my thread and called me a Liar – I was definitely baited into squabbling with her. I still do not know why this person decided to call me a liar when I did not post any attacks on anyone or make any claims about seeing anything.
I believe if Immy had chosen her words better – our interaction would have ended there.
Sorry... That's false information. I know the beach you're referring to and the people defaming the beach were ejected from the group and banned from the sim because THEY wanted to turn the place into their own little sex haven. Now they're out for revenge because their favorite form of CS violation was taken from them once again. (=_=)
Truth be told, the beach has STRICT rules against sex and intimate interaction between ALL avatars. (=_=)
I never mentioned anything about sex with child avatars, nor did I post any quotes from the original posters of this information from Xstreet Forums. Immy just responded by throwing around wild, unsubstantiated accusations and calling me a liar.
And I thought that her attack on me (calling me a liar) and the people that posted the information about the beach (the people defaming the beach were ejected from the group and banned from the sim because THEY wanted to turn the place into their own little sex haven.) Was a desperate attempt to discredit anyone that opposed her views so any other opposing view would not be taken seriously (sound familiar?)
It is not that I do not like Immy. As I said I did not even know he existed before he called me a liar on June 5th of this year.
Immy never presented any evidence that those people were ejected for that. And the owner of the beach told me that the person that posted about the beach wanted to get paid for her work and he refused – so she retaliated by posting.
This is when I realized Immy was lying and defaming people just to win an argument. And over the months this has been her standard operational procedure.
In her newest blog posting - she is calling me her stalker. And she referred to another post in that same thread mentioned above to prove her point. But, of course, she did not quote it or post a link to it. That would be exposing the facts. So here they are:
Immy from her blog today:
Using the most pretzel logic possible, she tried to "expose" me for being some sort of horrible person.
My story, based on fact:
I go to my favorite book store to buy books.
Kids are in the way because they're loitering.
One mother accuses me of looking at the kids and requests security remove me.
Mall security and store staff recognize me as a regular, know I'm just there for the books, in turn they remove the mother and her loitering kids.
The LiasBlue version:
I go to the mall to expose kids to hentai porn.
Mothers rally against me to protect their kids.
This is pretty persistent and becomes pages and pages of me saying she's twisted the details into some accusatory functional turn of phrase. I know I'm probably an idiot to respond to her. But, I simply can't stand to be lied about.
Page # 21/ Post # 312
I read Manga... Lots and lots of Manga. And I have a favorite book store. I used to be able to get outta work before school's out and get my books in peace. Usually once a week, 3 to 8 books, working from a list of series that I'm reading. (^_^)
I had one day of drama. I got out of work late and the mall was packed. When I got to the Manga rack, the place was swimming with kids who's parents decided that the bookstore makes a great babysitter. (>_<)
I'm look'n for my books, going down the list, probably had 3 by then when mall cops show up with a red-faced angry mother saying that I been eyeballing the kids in the store the whole time. (>_<)
I have selective mutism... From the abruptness of the accusation, my frustration over having to find ways to "excuse" myself to get the books behind the kids, and whatever... I don't think I was able to respond with much more than crying a little. (>_<)
Gladly, the people who work at the store know me well, came over and explained that I'm a regular and spend up to $60 a week off that rack. The mother and her kids were removed from the mall and the other kids were chased out as they weren't really there to buy anything. (=_=)
Of course, now, after that event I stopped going to the store and buy my Manga on Amazon.
There was no 'page after page' of me going after her for this.
Immy came back at me again on post #335/ Page #23.
And then Immy gets more aggressive on page #36 /Post #535 (still I have not responded to her Mall Mantra reading).
And if anyone wished to wade through the remaining pages of that thread and find what Immy refers to as an attack on her your more than welcome to search it out
Immy initiated our contact. Her choice. Also her choice to post RL information in a forum. But what she posted in her blog about being attacked by me in a thread that was not even about her at all - is more of her twisted half truths to make her look like the victim.
Immy could be right and I could be wrong. It is Immy’s tactics that are dishonest and that is my Issue with Immy and how she uses the public to bring down opposing viewpoints by posting lies and half-truths about anyone that opposes her.
I truly believe Carl Metropolitan did not deserve what Immy wrote about him or what she helped happen to his organization.