02-24-2009, 08:47 AM
Admin didn't respond to my PMs, so this is a response to Admin's comments in Re: BIG BROTHER (Waukegan District School) WATCHING YOU! post just before locking it.
Adminâs question: âDon't you think it's even remotely possible that they identified you based on signing several posts with your name? Or based on the subject matter of your posts?â
Answer: Of course! I never stated that was how they identified me. I wanted others to know so they could be careful. Because others â do not post their names, phone numbers and email address - the only way they could be identified would be by the characteristics of their written communication or information they provide and then they may be exposed. Donât they have the right to know the district is collecting this information? Shouldnât they be careful?
Adminâs statement: Since you began posting here, I've allowed you an incredible amount of leeway in the subjects of your posts, to the point of driving others away. I've done so in the interest of free speech and wanting to allow people an outlet for information, not just on our schools but on our community as a whole.
Reply: I appreciate your leeway! Thanks! Unlike most of the other posters on this site and due to the subject matter and serious allegations that I am making, I have signed my posts. Of course members of the administration and board members would have supporters on this website that might be offended by what I posted. It is impossible, to not alienate friends, family and business associates of people that you make allegations about. Of course people are going to take sides. I understand that.
Adminâs statement: âBut this is where I draw the line. Don't sign posts with your name or provide details that only you or someone involved with your case would know and then cry out that the district could be making a list of names based on the characteristics of your written communication or information you provide".
Reply: I didnât state the following as you have alleged, âand then cry out that the district could be making a list of names based on the "characteristics of your written communication or information you provide". I stated: âIf they can identify you by the characteristics of your written communication or information you provide - you will be exposed.â I did not state or imply that I was identified in this way.
Adminâs statement: I have issues with the district and some of their policies, but I'm not going to attempt to start a disinformation campaign
Reply: And neither have I!
Adminâs statement: âthat paints the district in a bad lightâ
Reply: Iâm not painting the district in a bad light. I have made very specific allegations backed up by documents provided to anyone on this website that took the time to read the information provided, about the board, board attorney and five members of the administration. I have never alleged that specific allegations against 13 members of the district, 7 of who are not even employees, have anything to do with the other 2,200 total employees, the students or the taxpayers.
Adminâs statement: âand increases the paranoia that keeps many employees from posting here.â
Reply: Definition of Paranoid: Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others. Employees have good reason to rationally fear and distrust the administration. It is not paranoia if they are really after you. And itâs not paranoia if they are monitoring this website, printing and filing the information. If they really do monitor the communications on this website, shouldnât employees posting on this site be careful about phrasing and subject matter? Isnât that just common sense?
Adminâs statement: And neither are you.
Reply: I would hope that after you read the above responses, you would realize that you made a mistake and took my two sentences out of context. You have questioned my integrity. And that is very important to me and I wonât allow anyone, not even a friend, to question it without responding.
After reflecting on the above, I hope that you will publicly apologize for taking my comments out of context and implying that my intent was anything except to help other posters, especially employees, stay safe while posting on this site.
Ron Sartin
Adminâs question: âDon't you think it's even remotely possible that they identified you based on signing several posts with your name? Or based on the subject matter of your posts?â
Answer: Of course! I never stated that was how they identified me. I wanted others to know so they could be careful. Because others â do not post their names, phone numbers and email address - the only way they could be identified would be by the characteristics of their written communication or information they provide and then they may be exposed. Donât they have the right to know the district is collecting this information? Shouldnât they be careful?
Adminâs statement: Since you began posting here, I've allowed you an incredible amount of leeway in the subjects of your posts, to the point of driving others away. I've done so in the interest of free speech and wanting to allow people an outlet for information, not just on our schools but on our community as a whole.
Reply: I appreciate your leeway! Thanks! Unlike most of the other posters on this site and due to the subject matter and serious allegations that I am making, I have signed my posts. Of course members of the administration and board members would have supporters on this website that might be offended by what I posted. It is impossible, to not alienate friends, family and business associates of people that you make allegations about. Of course people are going to take sides. I understand that.
Adminâs statement: âBut this is where I draw the line. Don't sign posts with your name or provide details that only you or someone involved with your case would know and then cry out that the district could be making a list of names based on the characteristics of your written communication or information you provide".
Reply: I didnât state the following as you have alleged, âand then cry out that the district could be making a list of names based on the "characteristics of your written communication or information you provide". I stated: âIf they can identify you by the characteristics of your written communication or information you provide - you will be exposed.â I did not state or imply that I was identified in this way.
Adminâs statement: I have issues with the district and some of their policies, but I'm not going to attempt to start a disinformation campaign
Reply: And neither have I!
Adminâs statement: âthat paints the district in a bad lightâ
Reply: Iâm not painting the district in a bad light. I have made very specific allegations backed up by documents provided to anyone on this website that took the time to read the information provided, about the board, board attorney and five members of the administration. I have never alleged that specific allegations against 13 members of the district, 7 of who are not even employees, have anything to do with the other 2,200 total employees, the students or the taxpayers.
Adminâs statement: âand increases the paranoia that keeps many employees from posting here.â
Reply: Definition of Paranoid: Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others. Employees have good reason to rationally fear and distrust the administration. It is not paranoia if they are really after you. And itâs not paranoia if they are monitoring this website, printing and filing the information. If they really do monitor the communications on this website, shouldnât employees posting on this site be careful about phrasing and subject matter? Isnât that just common sense?
Adminâs statement: And neither are you.
Reply: I would hope that after you read the above responses, you would realize that you made a mistake and took my two sentences out of context. You have questioned my integrity. And that is very important to me and I wonât allow anyone, not even a friend, to question it without responding.
After reflecting on the above, I hope that you will publicly apologize for taking my comments out of context and implying that my intent was anything except to help other posters, especially employees, stay safe while posting on this site.
Ron Sartin
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere / Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter / Injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates - Martin Luther King Jr.