Friday, July 12, 2013

Steve moves on

To Honey Boo-Boo?

The ubiquitous pizza-loving "manager"/booby guard who once never left Kate's side, has been MIA for awhile now. He has suddenly popped up again in recent months both with TLC's Honey Boo Boo and with the Little Couple. File this under #Hahahahhahaha.

With Honey Boo Boo and company:

Vine

On Jen Arnold's trip to China to adopt her son. Does China have pizza? Hope so:

1236 sediments (sic) from readers:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1 – 200 of 1236   Newer›   Newest»
Sherry Baby said...

On Jen Arnold's trip to China to adopt her son. Does China have pizza? Hope so:

_________________
If they only have mac and cheese and salad, he's in big trouble.

Sherry Baby said...

‏@MiloandJack 1m
@Kateplusmy8 YAY! U "know what" is finally fixed! Boy that sure took a while! :) #ThingAreLookingUp

___________________
Lights Out Man got neutered?

Greedy Gosselins said...

few check at that age. It's a job at the local eatery and most know how teens are. It's not the CIA

Potential colleges and universities check!! I'm just weighing in here and following the conversation. I don't think it's a good idea ever to let children have a private face and a completely different public face. Let's teach our youth to be genuine and real. Not fake. Just IMO.

chefsummer said...

I'm not to convinced that Steve has moved on from KK.

If she does tour with the book and Steve isn't around then I will be.

PatK said...

chefsummer said... 3
I'm not to convinced that Steve has moved on from KK.

If she does tour with the book and Steve isn't around then I will be

&&&&&&&&

Yeah, Kate's not doing a book tour without Steve.

PJ's momma said...

I don't think he works exclusively for/with TLC. Remember, he was 'guarding' her at the local fundraiser in a church...where she accepted $80 sandals. Jen's blog is from February, but IIRC, the fundraiser was in spring.

chefsummer said...

PatK said... 5

Oh I know that was just an example lol.

I should have said when KK does another event if Steve is there he's not done with her.

Kate is a twit said...

PJ's momma said... 6
I don't think he works exclusively for/with TLC. Remember, he was 'guarding' her at the local fundraiser in a church...where she accepted $80 sandals. Jen's blog is from February, but IIRC, the fundraiser was in spring.
-----------------

The Honey Boo Boo book signing was yesterday. Perhaps, it's part of their contract that they when they travel they have to use the security that TLC tells them to. Wasn't Kate's other former bodyguard also working for the family? I remember Robert had a post about it.

Save the 8! said...

He may even wake up one day and decide not to say those words anymore.


If he were my son, I'd make that decision for him. And, in fact, I have. What happened to being the parent/adult in charge?

been there done the teen thing said...

"If he were my son, I'd make that decision for him. And, in fact, I have. What happened to being the parent/adult in charge?"

What happened to picking your battles and not being such a hard ass on kids who are good kids who don't deserve it? It's just words. Religion decided that swearing is a crime. It's all relative. If we spoke another language then boookaphat or superzat could be a swear word. We defined the curse words! It is by no means the same as something tangible like murder or stealing.

Julianna said...

I'm just weighing in here and following the conversation. I don't think it's a good idea ever to let children have a private face and a completely different public face. Let's teach our youth to be genuine and real. Not fake. Just IMO.

&&&&

Yes, and patterns started when kids are teens often follow them into adulthood. It becomes a habit, and you never know if that language is going to slip out in public, at the most inappropriate moment when it's too late to take it back. You are correct in that potential colleges and universities do check. Guarantee it.

In college papers, I've seen obscenities and cursing that would make even a veteran bar drunk blush.

Kate is a slag said...

I always said, and I still say now, he was HIRED HELP and nothing more.

She LIKED and WANTED people to think there was something more there, but there never was.

She doesn't have a TV show anymore, and hasn't for a while, and he has to make a living, so he's not around as much, and when he is, it's because she pays him instead of TLC paying him as they did before (when SHE was with TLC).

For as much as she tries to portray herself as some can-do person, she really is quite helpless and useless. Can't even get through an airport by herself. So she hires Steve on the rare occasions (these days) when she needs a minder.

She's alone, and she's going to be alone for a very, very long time.

Big leaps said...

Everyone I know who swears has plenty of self control and does not swear around children or in contexts where it is not warranted. By your line of thinking people who swear have no control and oops anything might slip at any time. I don't think so. By your line of thinking then someone who has sex in their bedroom might slip and have sex in public. Someone who has a glass of wine at night might slip and suddenly start drinking & driving. Someone who prefers to sleep naked in their own home might start walking around naked in the neighborhood. LOL of course not! Far from it for most people. For most people they are able to control these behaviors and not slip into something bad. Same with cussing.

Save the 8! said...

Lots of new posters here tonite. Interesting.

Having sex or getting behind the wheel when impaired is not a reflex action. Swearing is, if you define it by saying it's ok to say when stubbing your toe.

Julianna said...

We defined the curse words!

&&&&

And we are defined by the words we choose.

Hard To Keep Loving Jon said...

What happened to picking your battles and not being such a hard ass on kids who are good kids who don't deserve it?


I'm not even sure where to start with this but I'm weighing in. Firstly, my kids and I don't 'battle'. We discuss. Secondly, parenting is a 24/7 gig. You don't get to allow SOME bad behaviour (using curse words) in the hopes they won't do OTHER bad behaviour (get pregnant, become murderers).

I'm actually afraid of the next generation because of what *I* feel is a trend of slack parenting and giving a child everything he wants.

Of course, I'm not accusing anyone here of that but it is certainly the 'Me' generation with a lot of kids out there.

AMD said...

So much for "making memories". In three of the six photos Kate posted of her children for "Photo Friday", Kate doesn't remember for sure where they were when the pictures were taken. If she can't remember, odds are pretty high that her kids don't remember either.

Sleepless In Seattle said...

OT-- Is there anyone here from Colorado? Will you be living in a new state?

"Northern Colorado wants to secede, with lawmakers starting to draw up boundaries of a new state they say will better represent the interests of their rural region.

The succession plan stems from growing anger over sweeping gun control legislation passed this year, as the state’s plans to move toward renewable resources and away from the oil and gas drilling prevalent in northern Colorado.

West County Commissioner Sean Conway said northern Colorado wants to secede because its “very way of life is under attack.” He said new state known as North Colorado would better represent the interest of people who live in the area, who lawmakers say are now being disenfranchised.

“This is not a stunt. This is a very serious deliberative discussion that’s going on,” Conway told CBS Denver. “There’s a real feeling that a lot of folks who come from the urban areas don’t appreciate the contribution that many Coloradans contribute.”

The secession plans are more than just idle talk. Representatives from eight counties in northern Colorado — along with two counties in Nebraska — met to discuss borders of the possible state. The lawmakers say they want to put the secession plan to a vote in November."

Sleepless In Seattle said...

Aw, Steve. Well at least Gina won't have to worry about Mama June being the other woman. I wonder if they have adjoining hotel rooms.

PJ's momma said...

Save the 8!, just a long-ago poster here, dipping my toe in the pool again. Cheers!

Mel said...

 I....wonder if the reason Kate does not remember where most of those pictures were taken, is they were most likely taken by production people

Bingo. We have a winner!

Sleepless In Seattle said...

Does Steve get discounts when he buys his shirts in bulk?

Sleepless In Seattle said...

Save the 8!, just a long-ago poster here, dipping my toe in the pool again. Cheers!

---------------

Hi PJ -- how have you been? Speaking of MIA, whatever happened to that Atlanta uber-fan, the Milo-in Training?

Sleepless In Seattle said...

Stop the presses! Kate responded to Milo. Unfortunately, it was after LOM flipped the light switch.

Meagler said...

Kate did say in her Book " I just want you to know" that she had not previously seen most of the pictures that went into that book.

She must have a collection of digital pictures that were taken by production crew and then sent to her or somehow given to her electronically.

Still, I have, years later, looked at other peoples pictures of my family, and been able to tell where or what event we were at. Kate not knowing tells me they had too much of a whirlwind life, or she was ...absent... whether in person or spirit.

As for Steve, I was one who thought there might have bee something going on between them. Today I wonder if there was something going on between them, but only in kate's mind.

Regardless, Kate again is exploiting her childrens private moments ( a sleeping child) to promote the sale of a cookboobk . She has no skills of her own...so sad.

chefsummer said...

Sleepless In Seattle said... 20

Does Steve get discounts when he buys his shirts in bulk?
_____

Maybe TLC and KK didn't pay him enough.

NJGal51 said...

I am a preacher's kid. I am a college grad. I am an army officer's wife. I am a good mom. I have a great government job (although I'm furloughed every Friday thru September). I read a lot and can carry on a fairly good conversation on many subjects. I am a Jersey girl AND I curse. I'm a regular poster here and I don't think I've ever "slipped" and offended anyone here. Some people curse and some people don't. I do. Excuse the hell out of me.

BTW Readerlady - The new Spellman mystery is out. I downloaded it but haven't started it yet it's next on my list to read. Can't wait.

fidosmommy said...

Who buys a cookbook to look at pictures of children? I would want to look at delicious food, plated beautifully, with a few glimpses of a fabulous background or table. Not sleeping children or whatever Kate is serving up to sell her recipes. That reeks of desperation to me. But I imagine Kate will do whatever she must to earn an income - except get and keep a long-term job.

PJ's momma said...

Hiya, Sleepless - life is good and hopefully for you too. That other lady shows up sometimes on Kate's twitter. I don't have an account, so can't see TwitIq (timeline), but have seen Kate respond to her occasionally. Including recently when she said SHE wanted a beach vacation this summer too.

Kristine said...

Well, I guess the ole' Neild Rat Claws are now wrapped around Jen & June's purses, huh? I can imagine it's tough paying a boobyguard $1,600+ per gig, when you're currently mediocre and unemployed.

The whole idea of Katie trying to re-invent herself, in order to spend more time with the pizza-loving Road Manager is nauseating. No more running trips with Steve... no more Zumba charities with freebies, no more special private trips together to Mexico, no more Nobu, no more salon/shopping excursions, no more adjoining rooms. Stevie is now bunking with Honey Boo Boo Child! Who's going to accompany Kate on her 2013 world-wide cook book tour? I saw this coming about a year ago, when TLC first hired the other huge bodyguard (formerly protecting the Gosselins on TLC trips), for the Boo Boo show. Everyone-- run out and get your US Weekly magazines. Boo Boo is has a scratch & sniff card inserted in this week's issue, to go with the upcoming Premiere episode. Kate never had that.

(Eeew, lol ;)

#Hahahahahahahahaha

silimom said...

Sleepless, I doubt it will happen. There's been talk for YEARS about Northern California and Southern California becoming their own states. Anything's possible but I think it will be highly unlikely.

silimom said...

Or maybe Steve just has an unofficial uniform for work. Just a thought.

Regarding swear words - again, I never said my kids swear like sailors. I think the confusion was my use of the term 'trash talking". For me, it's the way they put each other down while playing this stupid game. Outside of the game, they tend to rib each other like normal teens do.

Yes, Admin, my son is a very good kid and I am more proud of him then you could possibly imagine or words could ever express for a myriad number of reasons that I don't choose to go into here. Frankly, if this is his one vice, we're doing pretty well in my book. This is not, I repeat NOT, how he talks to people outside of playing this one game. And to some extent I take comfort that its not just him and that other parents I know struggle with this.

He has been warned, btw, that if this continues his game playing will be curtailed. So, no, we're not just throwing up our hands and saying "Oh well, nothing we can do." And to his credit, he is trying to change. As long as he is working on it and we are dialoguing about it, then I'm good. And for the record - this happens over private voice chat, not Facebook or Twitter or any other public forum.Not that that excuses his behavior. I too agree that it doesn't matter if you're saying it or writing it. But also I DO have a kid who DOES accept responsibility for his actions and if one of his friends were truly bothered by this, he would stop dead in his tracks and apologize then and there.

I apologize for going on about him, but I realized that I had given a false impression of my son and wished to correct that. Why? Because my son deserves that respect from me. He earns it every day.

Regarding our current culture of trash talk:

What concerns me is the way people talk to each other in general and I'm not saying calling each other stupid or idiot, I'm talking about people going on Facebook or Twitter or on a blog etc. and spewing the hate speech I see reported here and other places (unrelated to anything Kate) on the web. It's the way I see a lot of youth disrespecting their peers, teachers and adults calling them B****es and wh*** or the N word, and so on and so on so casually.

It bothers me that the only time someone seems to rein it in is if they think they'll be banned or be accused of a crime. It's okay until it's not and I'm going to keep treating people this way until the law stops me.

Whatever happened, as I said before, to self regulation? To doing the right thing because it was the right thing to do, not because you might get in trouble if you don't? To being able to monitor yourself, hold yourself accountable?

I was a teacher. I saw kids that came from homes where parents swore openly and the kids did too. Why? Because it's what was modeled for them. They didn't understand it was wrong, it was just what you said.

I'm for free speech but I'm also for common sense and good manners. We need to stand up for common courtesy in this country, gosh darn it!

Dutch Tulip said...

Silimom, my impression is that you have a great kid and that kid has a great mom!

readerlady said...

NJGal -- Thanks for the heads up on the new Spellman book. I hadn't heard that it was out. I'll head on over to Amazon and check it out.

Silimom -- I agree with every word you said. It's appalling to read the comments on news stories, forums, blogs, etc. and to hear what some people say in public. And it's not just the "unwashed masses". It comes from politicians, professors, entertainment moguls, writers, and so on. Sometimes I just want to hide out for a few years and hope that it goes away. I also agree on kids' language. I volunteer at my church's (Catholic) school. I don't hear it quite so much at the school, but in some of the other volunteer work I do, 6 year olds are peppering their speech with curse words, including liberal use of the F-bomb. We try to gently point out that this isn't something that should be done in public, but it's hard to get it across when the kids hear it at home every day.

A Pink Straight Jacket For Kate said...

You know, I can't help but think that this is an approvement from the mental/emotional drain he experienced with the Kate.

June & her family must be a breath of fresh air for him- and the Arnold's, a joy.


Dmasy said...

sillimom...you just keep on doing what you are doing. I appreciated your post.

TLC stinks said...

I believe she hires Steve now out of her own pocket since TLC ditched her: Las Vegas marathon, church charity event, etc. I guess he is available for her when he's not following Mama June around, LOL.

Meagler, I, too, believe an affair is in her mind, but I do think with their alone time on the beach in NC, her skimpy bikinis, hooker outfits, she attempted to seduce him (and maybe succeeded). Who knows? It was the reason people speculated because she was so obvious that she was attracted to him. In fact, because the divorce documents in 2009 said she and Jon had been living apart for two years, it makes sense that she decided when travelling with Steve on book tours that he was the one for her. Just my theory, but it fits because she told Jon then that the marriage was over according to Jodi and Kevin. What a dilemma for her. She had to keep the sham marriage going, while setting her sights on Steve. It didn't work it, LOL. He must have realized what a crazy b*tch she is.

The cookbook will be fun to see what recipes she stole or tweaked. Maybe someone here will take a bullet and buy it.

ITA, she has tons of pictures taken by TLC crew. Remember, they needed shots for the web site, publicity, etc. Sad she can't recall when they were taken. If she can't, most certainly the kids have little recognition of all those vacations. They are at the age now where a trip to Disneyworld would be a blast, but of course, she needs to grift it. And TLC was planning to send them on a Disney cruise at one point. Oh yeah, there was that pesky divorce that came in the way.



TLC stinks said...

Yes, I saw that BV is going after EmeraldCityJazz and Chablis4u. I guess he is still Kate's and Goody's hack. BV continues to threaten and the comments are full of swearing. What a cesspool he runs. I saw some tweets that he was on Dr. Phil?

Dmasy said...

Mama June is everything Kate has tried to "polished" herself not to be.

Kate must swallow bile everything she sees a clip of the Boo Boo show.

Their fame (and current fortune) is based on everything Kate would disdain.

She can fume and flutter all she wants, but the truth is that Honey's family is the TLC star now. They are getting all the pampering and perks that once were in Kate's grasp.

She has to be choking on jealousy and frustration.



Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said...

TLC stinks said... 38
Yes, I saw that BV is going after EmeraldCityJazz and Chablis4u. I guess he is still Kate's and Goody's hack. BV continues to threaten and the comments are full of swearing. What a cesspool he runs. I saw some tweets that he was on Dr. Phil?
-----------------------------

Based on that list of comments from RWA I'd say that subpoena was real. Wonder if there really will be a lawsuit?

JoyinVirginia said...

Imagine my surprise when I opened the latest issue of TV Guide an a Scratch and Sniff card to accompany the premiere episode of Honey Boo Boo this season was in there! This is why print media will never die. I think some of the scents are fart and roadkill. I don't think there is a Steves Pizza scent.

JoyinVirginia said...

Catching up on posts from last time I checked in. real Life has been kinda busy. Apologies for any Big Brother spoilerage. I will just stick to texting irl friends. Honestly, by the time I posted, I figured fans would have heard from live show, bloggers, E! News, HLN Showbiz news, etc. and seriously wanted to hear feedback from other fans about this ”realest” reality game show. (Anyone who is a big fan needs to check out live feed posters like on jokers, I have no idea how the producers will edit all the action taking place over the last couple days.)

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I picture Steve like Inspector Gadget, when he opens his closet there is a long line of perfectly pressed blue shirts, slacks, and black backpacks.

I am so confused! I don't understand the point to what happened last night. So someone has socks. Didn't they pretty much already know this about this person? Welcome to the internet. I'm guessing lots of people post under different names. Obviously it would be nice if people didn't, but I'm sure it happens pretty frequently.

It doesn't prove anything, nor is there any cause of action here. It's a big ole "so what." And I still don't understand how one is served and complies with a subpoena without a judge to enforce it. You do not have to respond to a subpoena unless there is a court case and a judge so that you can object to some or all of the subpoena to the judge. And if there is a court case, we would have found it by now. The first thing someone should be doing is objecting to the judge saying wait a minute, there is no earthly reason this person's IP needs to be disclosed, there is no cause of action here.

Just looking at the twitter account for the past few days and I can say with confidence I don't like or appreciate these tactics. It's not just Kate followers, many people have been caught in the fray. I saw they were going after some UCLA guy. I don't know anything about that but I don't care what he did, I don't think he should be tarred and fathered to make a point. I don't think it accomplishes anything productive. But maybe I'm missing something here. I simply don't believe that public shame and humiliation is productive or advances your cause. It's just that, public shame and humiliation. And it seems to be it's almost on the same playing field as the bad behavior you are accusing others of doing. I.e. isn't their beef that the "haters" have shamed Kate? So they shame the haters? All that is, is tit for tat. Not productive. May make you feel better I suppose for a few days, but then what? This is not the behavior or tactics of mainstream society. This is not how problems typically get solved.

Formerly Duped said...

Steve seems to get the 'biggest' reality stars to guard.I personally was never sure he and Kate were a romantic couple as I don't feel Kate is capable of affection/passion etc!

I don't care for HBB at all; I do like Jen but not so fond of her husband Bill who seems a little arrogant. The show seemed to change from their daily lives to building their new homes and wealthy lifestyle.They seem like shopping addicts! I saw the epi where Will was adopted ( didn't see Steve) and it was sweet. I wonder how they are doing if they now have two kids. I don't really watch the show regularly.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Oh also I see a correlation here to Paula Deen. Yes, she definitely screwed up. No question. And people reacted viscerally, totally justified.

But then, several days passed, and the hate continued and started to get really nasty. And good people like Jimmy Carter started saying hey okay she has been blasted enough, time to stop now. And you know what? Most people stopped. Sure she is still talked about and snarked about, but that very nasty tar and feather her string her high mentality has stopped for most people. It's not productive.

Anyway I guess what I'm trying to say is reacting in this extreme way to something that is upsetting is natural and probably justified, but in the long run, it doesn't accomplish anything if you continue to react that way day after day.

jendi said...

I disagree, Admin. I believe that revealing this information allows some of the people who have been attacked and libeled to see who is doing it. With this information in hand, they can now go to the police and perhaps get an order of protection or decide to file a lawsuit. There are so many libelous statements there. I also saw comments where this person said they lived close to someone and would visit them and also called for people to call someone's neighbors and write letters. Have you actually read the comments? This woman who left them is sick and if I lived next to her, I would get and order of protection.

TLC stinks said...

Tweet, I don't think RWA actually got a subpoena but perhaps a letter compelling LisaK to give a deposition. I believe Kate and BV's attorney are trolling around for dirt on Jon and Robert and all the outing of posters is a smokescreen. They are working on a lawsuit, I believe, just on Jon and Robert. The posters are collateral damage and gets them to shut up for awhile and cause them to retain an attorney. Paying for an attorney inflicts pain but they may end up getting sued if someone decides to go after BV. Someone should. The guy is a menace to free speech. I believe Robert's point of listing all the negative articles about Kate proves posters are within their rights to make negative comments. Kate hasn't sued any of those responsible for those articles, has she? Nope.

TLC stinks said...

I have never watched Honey Boo Boo or Little People. From what I have read, TLC always follows the same formula they used for Jon and Kate. Just how many different kinds of families can they showcase taking vacations? They all seem to end up being tainted by the money and notoriety. I am still waiting for these reality shows to disappear.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I always felt sort of sorry for Kate when she would rave about Steve and the crew because I always thought for most of the, it's likely just a job. I even talked about this in a recap. The sound guy doesn't want to get close to the kids, the sound guy wants to make great sound so he can put it on his resume and get the next job. And when the job is over he likely will have no interest in ever seeing them again. It was a JOB not a relationship. I think since the show has ended she's mentioned seeing the crew once I think, if that. Otherwise she misses them. Well they're never coming back Kate, sorry.

I think it's pretty clear now that regardless what fantasy Kate had in her head about Steve, this was a job for Steve. No different than working for honey boo boo or the little couple. He played it up and catered to Kate's fantasy and let the rumors fly because I think he saw Kate liked it and the publicity was good for her even bad press. But at the end of the day if Kate has no paying work for him, he's off to China or the deep South, forget it.

To Kate, this was her life and lifestyle and all she had. To most others, it was simply their employment and they had lives outside of it and even other gigs on the horizon. And that is what is sad is her total lack of awareness about that. The daddies comment and other comments she's made about the crew and Steve, them coming over for dinner, etc., is just so not how it probably is.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I believe that revealing this information allows some of the people who have been attacked and libeled to see who is doing it

&&

No, I get that, sort of. But there's huge evidentiary problems here. You can't just print this out and bring it to court, you will never get it into evidence that way. And why make it so public. If you were libeled or attacked, you can get yourself down to a law office and take care of your problems like every other adult. I simply cannot agree that this kind of thing, including IPs, should be spread all over the internet no matter whose side they are on and what they said.

Why doesn't BV reach out to whoever was attacked and provide them this info in private? By all means, if you are libeled, take care of the problem through the proper channels. All I am saying is I do not agree with tar and feather tactics, period.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

TLC stinks, I don't watch those two either but it sounds like the formula is the same and I don't understand that since hasn't this formula failed for TLC time and time again?

Family starts out pretty much as themselves and if they're interesting viewership skyrockets. But once it skyrockets TLC takes the money and lets them go wild on a nice house and vacations and celebrity lifestyle. Viewers lose interest because this is not the reason they first watched. Show fails.

How come they keep doing the same formula when it keeps failing? I don't understand this.

chefsummer said...

I think Steve played Kate rather they were involved or not.

He saw how she looked at him and he also saw $$$ he played off both.

AnonAgain said...

Well I can see from ECJ's list of comments that more than a couple of sheeple will have cause for lawsuits against her.

I like to snark on Kate but what some do goes way beyond that and I am glad I never participated in that.

jendi said...

I disagree again. I have seen people get orders of protection with less evidence than this.

FYI, "getting yourself down to a law office" is extremely expensive. It could have been 500 different people making those comments. It is would be pretty expensive to legally figure that all out.

With this info, it will give a person, say like this CJ person, the knowledge that they actually have a lawsuit against the person that made these comments and they can proceed (if they even want to).

I don't like BV or his tactics, but I think he did this because this Emerald person has been publicly going after him also. I guess he is a lot like the haters that he goes after.

NoNameThisTime said...

" All I am saying is I do not agree with tar and feather tactics, period."

Admin, I come here daily to tar and feather Kate. Isn't that what you and this blog is all about, to publicly humiliate Kate?

Jane said...

I'm curious about this stuff going down between the non-fan who's been outed by BV and had her RWA posts, IP, email address, etc published on the web. Does she have any recourse against BV?

It just surprises me that there hasn't been a public outcry against him.

IMO said...

Admin, of course people will still have to get their own subpoena in a civil case in in ECJ's case if the police think she violated california's cyber harassment laws they will get search warrants to verify the info.

But in my humble opinion BV has saved those libel 1000's in legal fees because they do know who they are going after instead of an anon.

I would have thought that the person who made some of those comments would have done so behind a proxy so they would never have been caught.

I also see on those comments that ECJ was very critical of you and the rest of us.

Catherine said...

This whole 'scandal' of someone using 500 different 'socks' at RWA is so so stupid. RWA had no rules about picking a name & sticking to it. The names chosen were usually about the topic. If someone wrote something that wasn't common knowledge, the next person would use the name 'Say What?' and the next person would say something like "I thought so' and on & on. It was a silly joke. If it was a post about a certain person, they'd choose a silly nickname of that person. It was nothing that wasn't done at all the other blogs except this one & maybe the one that 4 people post on. It means absolutely nothing. In fact, half the fun was choosing a name for that post. What a bunch of nothing.

I'm sitting back watching this without a lot of reaction because Bullyville is playing with fire & hanging in the bowels of the internet & his day to be burned will come. Not from me, but it's the nature of the beast when you spend your days sending ominous messages that you're going to wreck peoples' lives. It will burn him someday because that's how life works in that sordid world he lives in.

I love his post that free speech lives, while he spends his days bashing women for exercising their free speech. It will come back to bite him & I'll smile and chuckle to myself. I might even pop some popcorn.

Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said...

How come they keep doing the same formula when it keeps failing? I don't understand this.
------------------------

Didn't TLC make several hundred million from the
Gosselin show and now they're making hundreds of millions from HBB? I'm not sure how those are considered failing. When the audience tires of whatever show it is, TLC seems quite able to find another family to exploit and keep those hundreds of millions rolling in.

TLC stinks said...

I think TLC keeps the formula because people watch. And if there is an audience, advertisers buy time. TLC exists now not to inform but to make money.

I believe people, haters and sheeple, on Twitter are too invested in Kate and have too much time on their hands. If you have a busy and fulfilling life, you don't spend your time name-calling on Twitter. Very juvenile and there's something psychologically wrong there with that behavior. Both are equally to blame but I don't like BV's tactics and the fact that he is simply taking for granted what information he is fed by people who have an axe to grind. He will get himself into some legal trouble but right now he seems pretty full of himself. I think he believes he is bullet-proof with his porn attorney going after people. They seem to want to make a name for themselves as some type of internet vigilantes. For Kate to align herself with his trashy site speaks volumes as to how vindictive she is. I agree internet bullying is horrible, but BV's site is not the way to handle it. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

TLC stinks said...

Well, if you are a public figure, you leave yourself open to critics. Libel is difficult to prove.

Mel said...

Wasn't there some talk about Steve putting his hands on Kate to guide her through crowds, etc.?

I wonder if he does the same for Jen? Or Mama June?
I wonder if he will ever do couch interviews for their shows the way he did for Kate's?
Think he'll go off alone with Jen or Mama June for several hours to purchase, um, chicken, leaving everyone else behind?
Or escort either of them on photo shoots alone to Mexico? Just him and Jen in this romantic little place?

Probably not....hmmmmm....

Catherine said...

Also regarding RWA, I don't believe there is a lawsuit or a supboena. I think Bullyville & his anons scared Lisa into tuning over IPs. If there was a lawsuit there's no way her attorney would tell her to just turn over everything she had to Bullyville for publication. It seems pretty evident from the things turned up about Lisa that she has a past she's not proud of & I think she struck a deal that no lawyer would sanction. I know none of this as a certainty, but I do know those anons were working her over pretty hard.

Jane said...

IMO said... 52
Admin, of course people will still have to get their own subpoena in a civil case in in ECJ's case if the police think she violated california's cyber harassment laws they will get search warrants to verify the info.

But in my humble opinion BV has saved those libel 1000's in legal fees because they do know who they are going after instead of an anon.

I would have thought that the person who made some of those comments would have done so behind a proxy so they would never have been caught.

I also see on those comments that ECJ was very critical of you and the rest of us.

-------

Which ever side of the fence you're on, I continue to think it's wrong - unethical - for BV to out people this way. If he must, do it privately. He claims to have resources, use them within the scope of the legal system.

Catherine said...

Those fans crowing about ECJ and lawsuits & such need to think for a minute. This stuff that went on was a back & forth spat. If they're going to take anyone to court, they had better have clean hands themselves & they absolutely do not. I don't think they want to go to court against ECJ and have their blog records pulled. The libel they committed on CJ's blog & the lies they told on Ziggy's blog are far more actionable than ECJ having opinions. A judge would throw both sides out of his courtroom & take a shower.

OrangeCrusher1 said...

The bottom line with Steve, no pun intended, is that he has a contract with TLC; Kate does not, has not had one for almost 2 years now. When you see Steve with Kate, it's more likely she is paying him than he is with her as a friend.

Spending her summer hinting that she is editing the faux cookbook into something more personal by pimping out more pics of her "babies" is pathetic. Besides, the sheeple, who are the only ones desperate for Gosselin photos, have all pre-ordered her book. Not a smart marketing move IMHO. But she is certainly milking it for all it js worth, or so she thinks.

Spats.. said...

What is your proof that the others in the back and forth spats as you call them don't have clean hands? Some of the people ECJ is talking about I have never seen them ever interact with her.

Also keep in mind tha ECJ made a lot of her comments long before CJ's blog ever existed.

Millicent said...

Sugar Bear better watch out cuz we know how Steve likes to move in on the wimmin! He and June might become inseperable, and soon Sugar Bear will find himself living in the garage.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Agree with JAne and others.

Many states have free restraining orders and restraining order clinics to help you fill them out. Go down there like everyone else has before you and handle your problems. I know many brave women who did just that and never once asked for the help of anyone else to do it much less some internet web site. You take a deep breath, get yourself over to the clinic, and start the process. You be an adult about your problems.

Again, you cannot simply print this out and show it to a judge. It's just a piece of paper, NO GOOD in court. You would have to obtain it under your state's evidentiary rules, which will probably require a lawyer anyway. You most likely will need your own subpoena that is verified. Any which way you slice it you have to take care of this on your own. I still don't understand why this info can't simply be disclosed to victims privately so they can do that, should they chose to. There is no reason, none, an issue with a RO between two people needs to be handled in this manner.

Something to keep in mind, if one person is hung out to dry like this, guilty or not, why wouldn't someone else who may be innocent be treated the same? It makes no different to me if we are in those comments, innocent or guilty we should handle it like adults when people cause us problems. Through proper channels. This reeks of a SLAPP suit, and I have never liked SLAPP suits.

NoName, I have never seen anyone tarred and feathered here. I see celebrity snark and criticism of a public figure no different than many other celebrity snark sites out there. And like all of those sites, people have every right to do that. Clearly if the comments posted by BV are accurate they crossed a line, but that is what the legal system is for. Adults should handle their problems through mechanisms set up to handle our problems. Not the court of public opinion.

NotSmarttolibel said...

Speaking of clean hands, this woman had far from clean hands but she just won her suit against internet libel. Might be over turned but she still won for now.
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/07/bengals-cheerleader-sarah-jones-nik-richie-lawsuit-wins-child-molester/

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Jane you also hit on another point .....

If they have something and have the resources they claim they do, why not just DO IT.

Isn't this really wasting time and energy plastering info all over the web? Shouldn't your time and energy be spent sitting down with a lawyer and in a courtroom getting something ACCOMPLISHED? What does this ACCOMPLISH? IMO, NOTHING.

There is no a single reason all this info cannot be distributed to those who need it in PRIVATE if they are really serious about solving anything.

I think this is a game, outing is a fun game. Driving hits to their web site and revenue. They are for profit, are they not? I do not think they are serious about actually helping these people get justice. They have had months to do it and absolutely nothing has been accomplished. Do something already.

Millicent said...

Catherine said... 54

Also regarding RWA, I don't believe there is a lawsuit or a supboena. I think Bullyville & his anons scared Lisa into tuning over IPs. If
*******
I agree - I have seen zero evidence or proof that a lawsuit has been filed by BV or Kate Gosselin against Jon, RWA, the owner of RWA, any blogger, etc. I hope no one responded in panic to a subpoena without getting good legal advice. Any competent attorney would have told the issuer of that subpoena to go pound salt. If mine were one of the IP addresses turned over - you better believe I'd be furious and considering some legal action of my own.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I did put your comments through. ???

Happy2havenopartInit. said...

No one told ECJ it was wrong or unethical to out the people she was outing. In fact a couple of the non fans were encouraging it.

I have to point out that we are loud when it's someone on our side but not so loud when it's a sheep someone is after.

Mel said...

*once it skyrockets TLC takes the money and lets them go wild on a nice house and vacations and celebrity lifestyle. Viewers lose interest because this is not the reason they first watched. Show fails.*

Agree. But I don't think TLC is into any show for the long term. Their philosophy is make hay while the sun shines, drop the show when it starts to rain, move on to the next phenom, of which there are plenty.

I was surprised that Kate's show lasted as long as it did, in some ways.

OTH, the cancellation, seemed to come out the blue, and was very abrupt. I thought that TLC would let her linger on a while longer. The ratings weren't all that bad. I thought they'd eke a few more seasons out of her. Just the controversy around her would have been worth a few more seasons.

Actually, I think the beginning of her downfall was her interaction with the Palins. Something happened there that isn't being made public, IMO.

My suspicion is that there was some sort of negotiation/agreement. TLC would end the show, and in exchange whoever from the Palin family/crew/secret service wouldn't go any further with what they saw.

The way Kate's show ended had legal written all over it.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I have to point out that we are loud when it's someone on our side but not so loud when it's a sheep someone is after.

&&&&

I don't understand this comment. I thought Emerald was a sheep. I don't even know WHAT side she is on actually nor do I care. As far as I understand it she has said nasty stuff about us--doesn't make a difference to me, this is not the way to handle it regardless.

I don't care who you are what side you are on, this shouldn't happen to anyone. Proper legal channels should be utilized to handle your problems.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Tweet I mean the shows inevitably lose viewers as soon as they start doing the vacations and million dollar houses.

I guess what Im trying to say is that instead of having a successful show for 5 years with the vacations, why not keep the same format and have a successful show for 10? It seems like every time the vacations start the show jumps the shark.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Actually Mel is probably right....they just want to make hay while the sun shines then get out.

Actually, maybe that's better for them. If a show gets too big the cast starts demanding a fair salary and other perks. Too much trouble. Shows that run 3-4 maybe 5 years are probably easier for them to handle, then cut ties and find the next Honey Boo Boo.

I did always think the second they feel Kate is too much trouble or the show isn't chugging the way they want it to they would cut her--and they did.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

It means absolutely nothing. In fact, half the fun was choosing a name for that post. What a bunch of nothing.

&&&

This is how I feel. So what?

I don't prefer socks myself but it's not a crime to use a sock. Any libelous comments could have been emailed to the victims privately with info they need to file suit. Done and done. This is how normal people handle their legal troubles every day.

Millicent said...

Tweetle le de said:

Based on that list of comments from RWA I'd say that subpoena was real. Wonder if there really will be a lawsuit?
*******
The subpoena could have been printed on real paper, but if there was no lawsuit, the subpoena could not have been "real." First a lawsuit must be filed. Then it must be served on the defendants. Then those defendants have a certain period of time to appear in the case (by filing an answer to the lawsuit, or other court document).

Then any party can serve subpoenas for records they believe are pertinent to the case, but those subpoenas must be served on all parties in the lawsuit as well, and then a certain period of time must pass before records are produced. That gives any party time to file a written objection to production of the documents being sought.

The long and the short of it is this -- if you or anyone you know is ever served with legal papers or a subpoena, take it to a competent attorney and get good legal advice. I hope that's what the owner of RWA did.

Jane said...

Catherine said... 58
Those fans crowing about ECJ and lawsuits & such need to think for a minute. This stuff that went on was a back & forth spat. If they're going to take anyone to court, they had better have clean hands themselves & they absolutely do not. I don't think they want to go to court against ECJ and have their blog records pulled. The libel they committed on CJ's blog & the lies they told on Ziggy's blog are far more actionable than ECJ having opinions. A judge would throw both sides out of his courtroom & take a shower.

-------

Excellent point, Catherine! If the owners of those blogs think by removing some possibly defaming comments that they're now in the clear, they're very wrong. I have a sense that one of them has been supoened.

Blowing In The Wind said...

Since I don't have Twitter and never posted on the other blog, I have a question I'm sure that you wise people here can answer.

According to BV, these are sock accounts. But are they really? What is a sock account? I thought that was when you signed up, either on a blog or twitter, with your e-mail address under various names. Wouldn't you need different e-mail addresses to do this? How could one person have 500 e-mail addresses? Isn't a posting ID different from a sock account? I remember when I used to read GWOP, the posters there would just use different names to post, depending upon the subject...if the content of their posts was about Kate's clothing, their ID might be "Hooker Heels" (just an example). Just like here, you didn't need an e-mail address to post under various names.

So...are these 500 "socks" really socks? Aren't they just various names that this person chose to post under? Or is every ID a sock account, regardless if you need an e-mail address (such as on twitter) to post?

chefsummer said...

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 76

Tweet I mean the shows inevitably lose viewers as soon as they start doing the vacations and million dollar houses.
_________

Also while she was doing the whole woe is me thing.

She would tweet how she had to buy discount milk and cereal. While blasting Jon and grifting at the same time.

Blowing In The Wind said...

I don't understand this comment. I thought Emerald was a sheep.

-----------------------

Nope. Emerald is most definitely not a sheep...she is one of the most devoted haters out there. You're right, regardless of the side, this shouldn't happen to anyone. The problem is that when these people are "outed" (either side) their names are known, their addresses are known and they can be found by the crazy opposition out to get them, and we know that there are some of those people out there.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Millicent, I am scratching my head as hard as I think you are! Most lawyers who deal with subpoenas know it's a matter of course to object to all or part of them. You don't just get served with something as serious as that and say oh ok no problem here you go!

The most common objection I've seen is that the info they want simply isn't relevant or is so old as to not be relevant. For example, perhaps someone wants a criminal's mental health records from their stay in a boot camp when they were a teenager from 20 years ago. You could file an objection saying remote in time and not relevant and he was a juvenile, and more than likely a judge will agree with you and say N-O.

However, using that scenerio, I need a judge and parties to serve my objections to. I need a case number and name to put on my briefs. I need to know the judge and the courtroom number so I can serve the court clerk. I need a court date pending so we can orally argue the motions if we need to. If there were no case pending that subpoena should go in the garbage can. I'm not going to turn anything like that over without a judge to talk to first.

Jane said...

I think this is a game, outing is a fun game. Driving hits to their web site and revenue. They are for profit, are they not? I do not think they are serious about actually helping these people get justice. They have had months to do it and absolutely nothing has been accomplished. Do something already.

--------

BINGO! It's all about the money (and for a few, the fun, the hunt) BV has multiple websites that drive his revenue. More clicks, more money for the big guy.

ECJ isn't a sheeple, she's a very ardent non-fan.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Remember Matt Heckman talking about how that young man's address was revealed in the Reading Eagle and then he was killed?

I agree, addresses and personal info should not be revealed without your consent, no matter what side you are on. No matter how intense your conflict is, and there is no denying it has been intense, I think anyone on any side would feel absolutely horrible if someone unstable took that private information and went to go hurt someone or worse. This really is not a good thing. It's really not.

Mel said...

While the RWA thing sounded legitimate, and I have no reason to doubt her....she always seemed like a sputfire...pretty strong and unlikely to cave....there is also the possibility that there was no subpoena, and it was just the excuse given because she didn't want to publicly discuss the real reason. (Nor should she have to, if she doesn't want to. She has as a right to privacy, if she chooses.)

It seemed like BV was using some underhanded tactic to terrorize her. And whatever he did, it worked. #norespectforhim

PatK said...

Why doesn't BV, or Kate, or some of the fans who feel they have a lawsuit against non-fans, walk the walk instead of talking the talk. Get a suit filed and get on with it.

It's all become so boring. Listing all the posts somewhere online is merely a "look what I can do" statement. Yawn.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I counted TEN ads on the main page. TEN! Some are routing you over to similar related for profit sites like Cupidville. It's all a big money train. "Follow the money"? They can't seriously chant that with a straight face. There is also a giant "your ad here" thing so I guess 10 isn't enough??

He is USING them. And the sad thing is they don't see it. If he were not interested in revenue, he would have provided this information to them in private.

Catherine said...

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm wondering if BV is not engaging in cyber-stalking himself. His only goal is to humiliate ECJ because she wouldn't back down. The anons who first went after the haters on the Ash Wednesday massacre gave all credit for their actions to BV. He thinks he's Superman because he can afford expensive attorneys, but he went after people with no provocation on that awful day. Things were winding down on Twitter when he did that. He drew first blood with ECJ.

Catherine said...

As far as taking offense because people bashed Admin or posters here, please be fair. Posters here have been bashing Twitter 'haters' and RWA for a long time. You can't cry foul when it splashes back on you once in a while.

BeenFun said...

Well I am taking all this as a sign to drop out of this whole thing.
I remember reading Lisa saying on RWA that there is no way she would ever turn any of her posters info to Bv or anyone and that is exactly what she did.
Not that I don't trust you Admin but you have had all that insider info posted and even Robert himself (one of the reasons I loved this blog so much) and that is who Bv is really after, Robert & Jon.
I will still check in to read but no more posting for me.

Catherine said...

SPATS, yes CJ's blog came along late in the game, but all those women were also on Twitter, and on other boards before Twitter. These blood feuds go back longer than you or I.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Beenfun I appreciate that perspective, believe me. I wouldn't blame anyone for feeling that way. For what it's worth, I don't know anyone's IP addresses. I don't have an IP tracker. I use the simple blogger comments program that doesn't reveal IPs (other third party services do show IPs sometimes, but I don't use those.) I also think we've been able to stay on the outskirts of this mess and not let us get too mud deep into it. I think there's no denying this is one of the most extreme participants in this saga saying things that you usually don't see here or elsewhere. But if anyone asks for IPs, I wouldn't have anything to give them as even I don't know them.

Jane said...

Oh! Read the new Spellman book and it's a goodie :)

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Catherine, exactly. Personally I DON'T take offense to it. Whatever. And even though I was apparently named in the comments I'm the first to say wait, don't do this, this is not the way. There is justice, and then there is vigilantism.

Susie said...

You hide the shame and humiliation under the guise of public snark here at this site. There should be No difference if you shame a private person or a public person. The action taken is the same.

Spats.. said...

Blood feuds?

That's just silly.

Susie said...

PatK,

The same can be said for all of the non fans that have threatened lawsuit for the last six months. Get on with it.

Catherine said...

What you have to realize is RWA was a wild ride. We didn't have the intimate conversations you do unless someone was going through a crisis of some sort, then we'd use or more known names to communicate. I used to try to guess by writing styles who I was conversing with under different names on RWA & often I could tell. Those of us with more personal relationships communicated through email. The names were more often than not, SITUATIONAL. If BV doesn't like it, too damn bad. We were fine with it! We weren't out to please anyone else.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

There's a world of difference and even the Supreme Court says so.

Hustler vs Fawell: Celebrity snark sites are protected. The same against PRIVATE people, however, is not as protected.

In this country, laws are set up so that people selling us something in the public eye, be it trying to sell us votes, or new policies, or some kind of lifestyle/personality they want to us to pay for (the Martha Stewarts, the Rachel Rays, the Kate Gosselins), are much more open to criticism. This is for our protection, so those in such positions don't take advantage of us without a free and open forum to discuss what they want of us.

It's how it works. If any such celebrity would like the lower private figure standard, they can choose to leave the public eye. The hazards of entering the public eye mean you are accepting a much higher standard when it comes to criticism: actual malice. If actual malice is not for you, a private life is wide open to you.

Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said...

Since BV tweeted a link to the whole body of ECJ's comments on RWA (over 1400 made by her 500 "socks") either Lisa turned over access to her blog or he got access to the blog through a subpoena, right? Is there another way he could have accessed the contents of the RWA blog? I'm soooo confused.

Susie said...

I believe people at RWA used multiple fake names to throw off the people they were harassing as to their identity.

That was the primary reason.

Catherine said...

I didn't see Emerald out people. I won't go on BV's site, but she's not one of the old-timers and she admits she's not internet savvy. I've never seen her out anyone who wasn't already outed from years ago. Also, she has been viciously attacked. She didn't go after innocent people, whether you know of them or not.

Anonymous said...

Admin when you talk about private citizens and malice et all it makes me very worried for the people at RWA and on twitter who really went after people posting names addresses and phone numbers.

Layla said...

I think Kate mistook Steve and the rest of the crew for friends and family. She was surrounded by them all the time, and they filled the void when she cut all of her real family and friends out of her life. That's why she never missed any of the people she cut off. She had the crew there to take their place. She also started treating the crew (and Steve) the way she used to treat Jon (and probably others). She certainly tried to make Steve take on the husband role, and the crew was expected to wait on her and do the heavy lifting. Apparently they knew how to help her, even if others didn't. Think of that scene in the first RV episode, loading the bags into the RV. Kate told the crew, "At some point we need to stop playing 'we're filming a TV show' and get some real work done, because I'm really done here". Just like she used to be with Jon. If he wasn't doing exactly what she wanted him to do at that moment, then he was just playing. Or when she said that people walk out of her life, and she just keeps on going. Of course she did, because she was surrounded by the crew. They filled the empty void left by anyone else who walked away. But then, there was nobody to fill the void when the crew left.

They were her pseudo-husbands (hence her calling them crew daddies), not employees of TLC. But this time, it wasn't Kate who abruptly ended the relationships, it was TLC. And then, suddenly, they were all gone. I'm sure she was shocked and lonely and desperately sad when that happened. She had to have felt so alone after being surrounded by all of them for so long. She paid Steve to be with her just so she'd have somebody and wouldn't feel so lonely. He went with her on outings where he wasn't needed, like the twins' 2011 birthday trip (Wyoming?). That should have been a family trip, just Kate and the twins, but Kate had to have Steve there to complete the family unit.

It's sad in a way, thinking of everyone abandoning her all at once. She still clings to Steve and Deanna, but how long will that last? After all the people she has abandoned in her lifetime, however, it does seem like just desserts. Karmic payback for all the others she so cruelly tossed aside.

localyocul said...

Catherine said... 88
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm wondering if BV is not engaging in cyber-stalking himself. His only goal is to humiliate ECJ because she wouldn't back down. The anons who first went after the haters on the Ash Wednesday massacre gave all credit for their actions to BV. He thinks he's Superman because he can afford expensive attorneys, but he went after people with no provocation on that awful day. Things were winding down on Twitter when he did that. He drew first blood with ECJ

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

It seems to me he used subpoena power under the ruse of a lawsuit only to out ECJ etc. Is that even legal? And some of those BV groupies just use "anti-bullying" as a shield to do their own bullying.

Catherine said...

Susie, you may have noticed a lot of the nonfans have closed their Twitter accounts. Those are the ones who are "getting on with it" as you say, but they cannot talk about it. You won't hear about it when it's over, either. Sorry, that's just the way it goes, but it is happening. Especially the ones involving people's children.

chefsummer said...

I don't think Kate ever intended to sue Jon or Robert.

I think she just want some media attention and she got it.

Catherine said...

If a few of these feuds aren't blood feuds, I don't want to know what a blood feud is. A single mother's life was ruined when she lost her job due to a fan. A teenage girl is severely depressed, the woman who cost the single mother her job had her life threatened. I know of more than one lawsuit in the works. What do you call a blood feud?

Mel said...

Catherine, exactly. Personally I DON'T take offense to it. 
-----------------

Me, either.
Although the first time I saw something I'd posted here being ripped apart and snarked on on another site, I have to admit I did feel, um, a wee bit defensive. Well, ok, a whole lot defensive.

It was tempting to write a blasting post on that site to defend myself, since I never snarked here on anything I read there. But common sense prevailed,and I didn't do it.

If you're going to post on the internet, it's all fair game IMO.

Catherine said...

Admin, yes people were upset with you when people were being outed on this blog & your attitude was perceived as uncaring. But as Lisa said, if anyone attacked you she took it personally. She compared it to someone being mad at their sister & saying some things they might regret, but if someone else goes after your sister, you defend her. I think most people felt that way.

Catherine said...

In the end, I wouldn't be shocked if Lisa was blackmailed & if she was, it will come out. Someday.

Over And Out said...

He thinks he's Superman because he can afford expensive attorneys,

&&&&

Weren't there rumors that his house was under foreclosure? How can he afford expensive attorneys? What, exactly, is his job? Does his income come from outing people?

Over And Out said...

You hide the shame and humiliation under the guise of public snark here at this site. There should be No difference if you shame a private person or a public person. The action taken is the same.

&&&&&&&&&&&&

Baloney. I had NEVER EVER seen anything here that even comes close to the vicious attacks, vile language, outing, disgusting diatribes that were conducted on another site as well as on Twitter, where both haters and sheeple were slammed directly.

Over And Out said...

I agree, addresses and personal info should not be revealed without your consent, no matter what side you are on. No matter how intense your conflict is, and there is no denying it has been intense, I think anyone on any side would feel absolutely horrible if someone unstable took that private information and went to go hurt someone or worse. This really is not a good thing. It's really not.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

And that is a big concern. Suppose there is an unstable sheeple on twitter who has a hatred of those who do not support Kate, or verbally attacks a non-fan for supporting Kate's ex-husband. That non-fan is outed. At this point, the sheeple knows the non-fan's identity and if the battle escalates, the non-fan may be fearful of a retaliation that involves more than just a Twitter war. If that happens, what is BV's part in all of this, considering he is the one who outed the non-fan and revealed all of the personal information on that person?

Mel said...

I think Kate mistook Steve and the rest of the crew for friends and family. 
----------------------

Kate doesn't seem to have a good idea of boundaries in that respect.

Remember how she would refer to people who had interviewed her, or the View ladies, as her "new friends"? And act like they were now besties?

Um, no, Kate. They were just doing their jobs, which meant being pleasant to your face. They were, and are not, your friends.

Joyce said...

Catherine,

I guess what goes around comes right back at you because I remember numerous comments by Lisa and others demanding that EDOS come down or they would reveal personal information about the fans.

That is blackmail or extortion. Whatever you want to call it.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Mel, I have thought for a long time she doesn't know what a friend is versus just an acquaintance who was being polite. And that's sad.

Catherine said...

When BV revealed that PMK's IP shows her in Clarkston MI, an anon immediately declared he was local & would be glad to take care of things. BV knows the scum he's dealing with. That's why I'm convinced he will go down someday from his own doing. I just hope an innocent person with an opinion doesn't go down first.

Joyce said...

Catherine,

There are comments still standing on RWA where Lisa herself attacked the Admin. Big time. I never ever saw the Admin say anything negative about Lisa or RWA

Joyce said...

That single mother did not lose her job because of a fan. She lost that job because of her own illegal actions at work.

And what does being single have anything to do with it. An illegal act is an illegal act.

Dmasy said...

Mel, I understand how you felt. I wasn't a reader at the other site. I had never posted there. Someone alerted me that I was being discussed.

I checked.

Well, I have never considered myself a "...fat, Croc-wearing old hag."

There were other comments.

I was tempted to respond. Then I saw that another poster from here (who is well-loved) tried to explain herself. That approach didn't work. She was blasted for a well-thought out and kind post.

I stayed silent.

Catherine said...

Mel, I've been blasted on this site for things I've said on Twitter, on RWA for things I've said here, and on Twitter for my intense dislike of Kate. I realized that someone might say something about you as 'Mel', but you're anonymous & you have to learn to take some lumps if you're going to stick your neck above the crowd & take a stand. You eventually get used to it lol!

Joyce said...

RWA was a sewer pit. Plain and simple. You can't defend that.

AnonThisTime said...

"A single mother's life was ruined when she lost her job due to a fan. A teenage girl is severely depressed, the woman who cost the single mother her job had her life threatened. I know of more than one lawsuit in the works. What do you call a blood feud? "

If a fan cost a single mother her job, why didn't the single mother sue the fan. Makes no sense.

Catherine said...

Joyce, I'm sure you have a good point. I don't know anything about the EDOS days, so I won't argue with you. I know that most people were happy to keep it all on the internet w/o ever imagining it would be taken into people's real life & hurt their kids. That's the part I find abhorrent.

Sherry Baby said...

Steve Benz ‏@steve_benz 3h
@Kateplusmy8 I host aft on @wsdichicago and would like to have you as a call in guest on my show #TheBlend. Can I contact your mgt?

Kate has management?

_______________________

Vlad ‏@PhonkMaster 10h
I just gave Kate Gosselin 8 bape car seats

Um, well, okay. I'm sure she will appreciate eight bape car seats!

BMA said...

From what I recall, BV lost at least one house & someone said he went bankrupt twice. I don't know it for a fact. He seems to be making plenty of money these days off his disgusting websites, but that's only based on appearances. I have no way of knowing if it's true.

chefsummer said...

If the non-fans are outed then shouldn't the fans be outed as well?

Or are the fans not a fair game?

Sherry Baby said...

I was tempted to respond. Then I saw that another poster from here (who is well-loved) tried to explain herself. That approach didn't work. She was blasted for a well-thought out and kind post.

I stayed silent.

_______________

Ditto. I saw how others here was blasted when their posts were carried over there, and even admin was poked at. I never commented, either. There was no winning and there was no sense crawling in that hole.

Sherry Baby said...

I guess what goes around comes right back at you because I remember numerous comments by Lisa and others demanding that EDOS come down or they would reveal personal information about the fans.

_____________
Out of the loop here. Who or what is an EDOS?

chefsummer said...

Fired Up 4 Kate ‏@MiloandJack 2h
@toozgooma33 @Kateplusmy8 Kate has answered this b4....Nayla was adopted out 2another loving hm. 2dogs pls 8 kids was 2much 4Kate 2handle!
____

How does Milo know what Kate can or can not handle?

Catherine said...

As I said, I'm not a lawyer. I'm just wondering out loud if Kate & BV will get away with threatening Lisa behind the scenes to get people's IP's and blog posts, if that's what they did. I had nothing to do with EDOS or threatening or blackmailing anyone. I stated opinions only. They may not be popular or politically correct, but that is my right. I never threatened to sue anyone either, but if my kids are harassed, I won't hesitate.

Pau16 said...

Does all of this outing, Twitter battles, out-to-get-you blogs, and controversy go on with other celebrities, or is Kate's Twitter one of the few that becomes a verbal battleground for so much hatred and vile spewing? I'm not on Twitter, and I don't read other celeb's timelines, except occasionally check a few sports figures to see what's going on with trading, games, etc. But I've never seen anything like this happening with them.

Fleecing The Sheeple said...

Dmasy said,

Well, I have never considered myself a "...fat, Croc-wearing old hag."

===

At some point, weren't we all fat, croc-wearing old hags with curlers in our hair, white athletic socks and mumus? We all laughed about it

katie said...

EDOS was a blog made up to give RWA a taste of their own medicine. It's been closed for years.

Dmasy said...

Fleecing, yes we were.

Some of us got dressed that way for one of our virtual parties. I forgot about the mumus!

I guess I need to wear my "label" with dignity!

Kylie said...

Jendi, here is the link to BV's outing last night. As you can see, there are 500 or so screen names but all belong to one IP address. I don't care at all about who ECJ really is, where she lives, what she does and she has every right to say what she wants to Kate -- she deserves it, the only thing she shouldn't be allowed to do is threaten her. This whole thing is just out of control!!!

http://www.bullyville.com/?page=articles&id=743

Kylie said...

Admin asked: How come they keep doing the same formula when it keeps failing? I don't understand this.

It seems to me it's like one of the statements that AA adheres to: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Enough said...

Over And Out said... 115
I agree, addresses and personal info should not be revealed without your consent, no matter what side you are on. No matter how intense your conflict is, and there is no denying it has been intense, I think anyone on any side would feel absolutely horrible if someone unstable took that private information and went to go hurt someone or worse. This really is not a good thing. It's really not.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

And that is a big concern. Suppose there is an unstable sheeple on twitter who has a hatred of those who do not support Kate, or verbally attacks a non-fan for supporting Kate's ex-husband. That non-fan is outed. At this point, the sheeple knows the non-fan's identity and if the battle escalates, the non-fan may be fearful of a retaliation that involves more than just a Twitter war. If that happens, what is BV's part in all of this, considering he is the one who outed the non-fan and revealed all of the personal information on that person?

***********************

If people continue to engage in "Twitter wars" with someone they believe to be mentally unstable, they are playing with fire. Wouldn't the solution be to STOP?

Catherine said...

Sorry ladies, I see there are a lot of hard feelings. I never heard of the crocs, don't know anything about EDOS, so I can't comment. As far as RWA vs the fans, there's plenty of fault on both sides, but I will always consider the fans to be the vile ones. I can't speak for the old days of RWA, I simply don't have any knowledge of it. I never heard of any of you until well after Kate went on Twitter and I mostly stayed on Twitter but I've been gone for a long time. This stuff about ECJ drew me back in for today, but now I'll sign off. Take care.

Katie said...

The anonymous group can gain access to a website without any problems. They completely took over the WBC website. I wouldn't doubt that is what happened if anything.

BMA said...

I'm very suspicious of people who submit links to Bullyville.

localyocul said...

Hold the phone! I thought those "socks" were twitter socks. You see them sometimes wehre someone makes one up and there are 2-3 tweets total. Now I see those are just log-in names at RWA! I looked over there after someone said I posted over there and they would change their name to fit the situation like Catherine said. This is just stupid.

Over And Out said...

If people continue to engage in "Twitter wars" with someone they believe to be mentally unstable, they are playing with fire. Wouldn't the solution be to STOP?

________

It might be too late to stop, if that person has been "outed." It's a little like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. This should have been stopped a along time ago, but I believe it's only been recently that one person has gone over the edge in rants and tirades.

Kate should have had the sense to stop this a long time ago and pull the lifeline on twitter...but she didn't.

TLC stinks said...

Interesting discussion. A while back I asked what happened to Preesi. I know she is still around but out of the blue she decided to stop posting about Kate. Yeah, some of the stuff was incorrect, so I wonder if she got the word to stand down on Kate.

Catherine, I used to read over at RWA. LisaK assured her commenters that BV was all bark and no bite. She spoke with bravado and even engaged with posters at BV. I think she claimed to have an attorney and was building her own case. I hope the attorney part was true and it makes sense because an attorney would advise to shut down the site if there was an investigation pending litigation. It was ominous when she warned those who had made death threats with her final post. I gotta say, that may be a big part of what happened. Also, there was speculation that Dana Hoffman posted at RWA, so that's a way to get to Robert. In the end, LisaK lost control of that site. Death threats are crossing the line although I don't recall anything like that being posted but I didn't read it all the time.

BMA said...

Pretty sure the point was made that, yes, Lisa bashed Admin, but when BV went after Admin, Lisa made the comment that it was like watching someone say something about your sister. I'm not happy with Lisa by any means, but the comments went both ways. Get over it.

Fleecing The Sheeple said...

Fired Up 4 Kate ‏@MiloandJack 2h
@toozgooma33 @Kateplusmy8 Kate has answered this b4....Nayla was adopted out 2another loving hm. 2dogs pls 8 kids was 2much 4Kate 2handle!
____

How does Milo know what Kate can or can not handle?

====================

But wait, Milo! With so much positivity (I'm starting to get very annoyed with that word), couldn't Kate handle anything? Are you saying that she failed to meet a challenge presented to her?

Milo is so funny...

readerlady said...

I'll own the fat and old. I've never owned a pair of crocks or a muumuu. My normal attire is jeans and a tee or sweatshirt. I don't wear athletic sox, and the last time I had a curler in my hair I was about 16. The biggest problem with the Sheeple is that they just can't understand that people who dislike KK can be, and mostly are, educated, articulate, active people. Some of us are retired, some of us do volunteer work, some are SAHMs, some of us are professionals, and some of us are blue or pink collar workers. Some of us are Christian, some are not. Some of us are white, some black, some Asian, some Native. My point is, we are a very diverse group. Dislike of KK is an equal opportunity activity. The Sheeple can't understand or accept that.

Fleecing The Sheeple said...

If a fan cost a single mother her job, why didn't the single mother sue the fan. Makes no sense.

===============

It's very easy to say, "lawsuit!" However, if you are a single unemployed mom, where is the money coming from? Attorneys want to be paid, and such a suit could drag on for a very long time.

chefsummer said...

Fleecing The Sheeple said... 148

I guess Kate is can do Kate some times or most of the times. lol

Anonymous said...

chefsummer said... 129
If the non-fans are outed then shouldn't the fans be outed as well?
Or are the fans not a fair game?

Quite simply the fans will not be outed by BV because Kate didnt team up with them to out fans. Kate teamed up with BV for the publicity she could get out of playing the victim of Internet bullying. Unfortunately for Kate no one really cares about her anymore and the publicity she's gotten has been negligible. The hard core fans (MsGoody, Lana and a few others) are just as bad as the hard core haters on twitter. If I were Jon I would have taken legal action against them for some of the things they've said about him.

Sorry for rambling on, but my opinion is that Kate is either paying BV or has some type of agreement with them. Teaming up with BV is not going to sell cookbooks nor will the publicity it gets you. Any journalist worth his salt would go on her timeline and see that "bullying" is going on on both sides. They could also trace back to the beginning of Kate's alliance with BV and see where it appears that she and her fans are feeding them information.

Gayle (who can't sign in today)

Fleecing The Sheeple said...

There are comments still standing on RWA where Lisa herself attacked the Admin. Big time. I never ever saw the Admin say anything negative about Lisa or RWA

============

True...some very nasty comments I couldn't believe were coming from her, and yet admin never refuted anything, never stooped to that level and never attacked the blog or its owner. It was almost like admin was being baited to enter the controversy, but she didn't. It eventually settled down.

localyocul said...

Catherine, don't leave I am interested in what you have to say and you have been very respectful. I think we were laughing about the crocs. I saw one post calling RWA a cesspool and that was it. We're not going to go whining to BV!! Please stay!

localyocul said...

For clarification when I said "this is just stupid" I meant the BV outing ECJ for having all those socks. They are not socks they are screen names. Some of them are kind of funny actually

Somewhere In Time said...

Looks like Kate has gone shopping. She needs a break from the hard work she's done on her cookbook. She certainly seems to need some "me" time. Didn't she just take off and disappear from Twitter for several days? What would she do if she had a "regular" 9 to 5 job, have to come home to cook, clean, and do laundry and there would be no "me" time whenever she wanted to take off to parts unknown?

BMA said...

Yes local, it's very stupid. If people couldn't tell those names were made up on the spot to fit the situation or person discussed I feel sorry for them. I knew the first time I ever saw RWA that the names were situational. BV thinks he solved some ancient riddle that most of us figured out all by our lonesome.

Somewhere In Time said...

Ursula Bukes ‏@ursulab9 1h
@Kateplusmy8. Busy watching the last episode of k+8.my heart is broken,what will I do without kate + her awesum kids,going to miss you !

-----------------------------------

Her heart is broken? My word, woman, get a grip.The show ended two years ago. Kate certainly does have some strange fans!

Jane said...

In response to a question asking if she's seen Jamie recently, Kate replied;
kateplusmy8
@02_sisi absolutely! Just saw her two days ago..... #besty
4 hr ago from Twitterrific

Guess we know who she was drinking with a few days ago.

BMA said...

Lisa announced she was closing her blog, then she left all the content in place. I'll never believe she didn't give BV access to everything all by herself. I also believe she never would have done it if she wasn't threatened. I think he has something very embarrassing on her because she wasn't the type to sell out her posters.

Anonymous said...

I bet I posted more in one year at RWA than ECJ ever imagined. I also used tons of names depending on my mood or what topic I was discussing. If it was about Kate, I would use a name that referred to her, and so on. I'm no internet sheriff, but I'm pretty sure that's legal.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

People even do that here sometimes, change the name to fit the situation. Usually I let it slide unless it gets out of hand. It's pretty obvious they're not all separate poeple, lol. It's not like they are coming in posting as Sarah, Shana, Shauna, and Lily. That would be implying different people. Rather they pop in as What's she done now? And Steve's Beard and Grifter Central.

Hardly the same thing. Big reveal that was not.

Fungirl said...

Whoa whoa whoa 500 different log in names? 1000s of comments? That chick needs a job, lol. If she has one, she should be fired too. That's just wasting your life. I read through some of the comments and she can be really nasty. I don't know why people keep saying there is no lawsuit. The owner of the blog said there was one didn't she? I think there are lots of lawsuits going on.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Lawsuits are public record. No one has been able to find hide nor hair of it. Silimom even looked I believe and I think she said her husband has access to various legal searches. If I recall she didn't say there was a lawsuit. Just that she got a subpoena. Why wouldnt BV be crowing about it if they filed anything? That's what they do!

When I see a case number, a filing court and a docket, I will believe it.

Anonymous said...

Also, a few times on RWA, I actually answered myself just for fun. OK, off to get a life!

Blowing In The Wind said...

What I could never understand about these Twitter wars is that both sides are supposed to be mature adults, yet they behave like taunting middle-schoolers playing a game of tit for tat. Both sides are guilty in baiting each other and taking the bait. You'd think that they would know better, that nobody is ever going to win, and you'd also think that the sheeple wouldn't want to clog Kate's timeline by embarrassing her in such a way. But, nevertheless, it continues, and Kate allows it to continue.

Whatever happened to the Walt/Kelly person? He was "outed" some time ago and disappeared. He also posted at RWA, if I recall. Wasn't there a problem with one of the sheep allegedly accessing his files on a database and turning them over to BV?

I can't keep track of all of this, and it's probably just as well. Aren't we going to have another virtual party? My orange mumuu has just been cleaned and pressed.

TLC stinks said...

Well, I own a pair of crocs, LOL. They are great in the garden.

I agree the names used at RWA were topic inspired. They were pretty funny.

Great catch about the tweet. Must have been quite a sight of two skanks pounding down drinks. I guess Jamie is in town for her usual summer getaway at the Konpound. Kate must have some work for her to do.

Blowing In The Wind said...

I bet I posted more in one year at RWA than ECJ ever imagined. I also used tons of names depending on my mood or what topic I was discussing. If it was about Kate, I would use a name that referred to her, and so on. I'm no internet sheriff, but I'm pretty sure that's legal.

------------------------

That is not considered a sock account, is it? That's just a sign-in ID?

Choosing a name said...

Fungirl, they aren't log-in names, inferring they had different passwords, etc. When you finish your comment you have to give it a name, so a name was chosen. It was common knowledge and yes, it was fun choosing the names. I guess you had to be there.

Catherine said...

Fungirl, you say ECJ is nasty. Do you think it's nasty to mock someone who was the victim of brutal childhood rapes? Put yourself in her shoes. She was mocked daily & still is. It goes both ways.

Catherine said...

Let's not forget the fan who said someone's daughter looked like she just got raped. Is that nasty? Should she sue? On what grounds, an opinion, however nasty? That's not the real world.

Melissa NV said...

Hold the phone! I thought those "socks" were twitter socks. You see them sometimes wehre someone makes one up and there are 2-3 tweets total.

&&&&&&&&&&

Exactly,. and yet BV is putting it out there as "sock accounts," which they are not. Does he know the difference, or does "sock accounts" sound so much more damaging?

Dontcarewhatmynameis said...

ECJ was using a lot of her socks to harass people. Read the comments she made.

I don't care what names folks use but if they are hiding so they can harass someone I dont' agree with it.

Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said...

Just a reminder of what Lisa said:

After six long years I have decided to permanently shut down this blog. I have been very fortunate to meet some great people because of RWA and I will continue to keep in contact with those closest to me. I also want everyone to be aware that BullyVille was not bluffing after all. I was served with a subpoena today. They are gathering information for the lawsuit that Kate has against Jon and Robert. I have had the subpoena verified, it is a real legal document. For those of you who posted death threats, I’m certain those are being investigated. As long as this site is up and running it could cause serious legal issues, and I would never want those type of issues to be a burden on any of you. I have to agree that I don’t think that alleged death threats should ever be made against anyone. I hope everyone can move on with their lives.

BMA said...

One more thing about the comments on RWA, then I'll go. Most of those comments were quips, along the lines of some being longer than Twitter, but shorter than most here. There were very few paragraphs. It was easy to write twenty comments in one day if you were going back & forth on a topic. If BV has all the comments, he already knows that. He tweeted a few days ago that it was time to destroy or ruin (something like that, don't know the exact verbiage) one of the haters & I guess we all knew who he was talking about; the one who refused to back down.

Jane said...

Re Walt/Kelly - IIRC he said he would no longer post due to a lawsuit but it wasn't clear if he was bringing the suit or if he was being sued.
Or it could all be hogwash :)

Anonymous said...

Blowing, yes exactly. Using different names after different post.

Anonymous said...

IIRC Walt went private after BV (or one of their minions) said that they had access to his bank accounts, credit cards, etc. I believe that he closed down or put a hold on all of his accounts for a weekend until the bank reopened and he could change things. It may have been a holiday weekend because I think it was more than just Saturday and Sunday. He's been private ever since. I think he was bringing a lawsuit against them. This was back when the whole BV thing began and Kate had that "anon" tweeter that was supposedly getting this stuff. I think the anon eventually said that Kate had him do it and he had screenshots of her DMs.

Gayle (and I still can't sign in).

Mel said...

Sounds like their is some confusion between screen names and log-in names,which are not the same thing. And aren't screen names when commenting on a blog different than how twitter names work?

A lot of RWA wasn't my style, but sometimes they were pretty hysterical over there. And when they were on twitter, too.

Kate is a twit said...

I really do wonder about Kate's fans. They say that when a random tweeter posts that they've seen Kate somewhere, that the non-fans harass that person. Yet, this one actually wants this tweeter to say Hi to Kate for her.

Alyssa Seiders ✨ ‏@AlyssaSeiders 48m
My mom is stalking Kate Gosselin in Target 🙈

sarah ‏@gypsi001 31m
@AlyssaSeiders tell her gypsi001 says hi! :) @Kateplusmy8

Does gypsi really expect this person to go over and tell Kate that she said Hi?

Hoosier Girl said...

You know what bothers me the most about the BV guy? He bills himself all over as a former Marine. And I get that. Once a Marine, always a Marine. And Huge Kudos to him for serving this great country.

But he's championing Kate Gosselin who said something along the lines of 'it's 9/11, that day the bombs went off or whatever' (I know that's not exact, I'm just going on memory. Kate fans are welcome to give me the exact quote if they want.)

I don't care what branch of the service you were/are in, when you served, where you served. Everyone who has served this country (and their families) finds a comment like that BEYOND offensive.

No service member I know would lower themselves to that level. Disrespecting fellow brothers and sisters in arms for a Z-list reality has been.

All I can come up with is, he must desperately need the recognition and money that came with this?

getofftwitter said...

PJ's Momma and anyone else, who wants to see the fans and Kates tweets: use this, it replaces the other twizq or whatever that was, and you don't have to sign in to twitter either to view tweets:

http://twitter.com/search/realtime?q=kateplusmy8&src=typd

Rhymes with Witch said...

Although the first time I saw something I'd posted here being ripped apart and snarked on on another site, I have to admit I did feel, um, a wee bit defensive. Well, ok, a whole lot defensive.

It was tempting to write a blasting post on that site to defend myself, 112

I had a similar experience and my "cooler head" also prevailed and I didn't respond. I've never regreted my lack of response. :)

Layla said...

So, what does BV think he is going to do, comb through all twitter and blog archives and attack anyone who made a comment that Kate doesn't like? If so, then he's going to be working on this forever. It looks like he's going after the most active posters/tweeters, but I think he wants us all to be afraid to speak. And yet, he can't take legal action against any of us, Kate has to be the one to do it. She'll spend the rest of her life in court if she wants to sue everyone who doesn't adore her. Or is BV just trying to intimidate everyone with a dissenting opinion into being silent?

I'm still trying to figure out the death threats. I have never seen any, and yet the fans constantly claim death threats agains Kate (and the kids!) are being made. Where? By whom? All I have seen is a picture of Milo with Kate on a stick for something-on-a-stick day. Was that a "death threat"? It was a cartoon, and it depicted Milo, not a non-fan. I guess it was in bad taste, but it was obviously a joke. So, what else is out there? What are they talking about?

Kristine said...

We're making beer can chicken on the BBQ, for the first time. I was given the recipe at the AF Base, about 15 years ago.

I went on Twitter last night, and think @IrishFan47 could be Milo. I'm almost certain of it. I read 'HIS' posts, and this person is either a hater baiting Katie, or Milo. I say this, because everyone knows no man desires Kate enough to spend more than one second, trying to bed her. No one except Milo. Read Irish's tweets. Someone on twitter, called him out before I even realized it. He only tweets to Gypsi, Milo and of course, Kate. Period. He claims to be a successful Architect always on business trips, madly in love with the Momster.

Tweet-le De Tweet-le DUMB said...

Kate is a twit said... 177
I really do wonder about Kate's fans. They say that when a random tweeter posts that they've seen Kate somewhere, that the non-fans harass that person. Yet, this one actually wants this tweeter to say Hi to Kate for her.

Alyssa Seiders ✨ ‏@AlyssaSeiders 48m
My mom is stalking Kate Gosselin in Target ��

sarah ‏@gypsi001 31m
@AlyssaSeiders tell her gypsi001 says hi! :) @Kateplusmy8

Does gypsi really expect this person to go over and tell Kate that she said Hi?
----------------------

Perfect example of how Kate's fans want people to think they have a personal relationship with Kate.

JoyinVirginia said...

OT: blowing in the wind, I have green crocs. Can't come to a party tonite to, i'm gonna see Ron Perlman and Charlie Hunnam and giant robots in Pacific Rim! Plus I have the new Tim Dorsey novel of Serge Storms adventures in Florida, to keep me up late reading. Squeeeeee!

Kate's Cart said...

Jane said... 161 kateplusmy8
@02_sisi absolutely! Just saw her two days ago..... #besty

It's not even a fan - just a newly created account, most likely Kate or Milo to ask about Jamie

Kristine said...

Blowing In The Wind said... 170
"I bet I posted more in one year at RWA than ECJ ever imagined... I'm no internet sheriff, but I'm pretty sure that's legal."
________________________________________________

I've never posted at RWA- only here, and GWoP. With that said, where's the 'New Sherifffff' these days? I once told New Sheriff, I'd blast her down like Clint Eastwood's Granny, in "Every Which Way But Loose" if she came anywhere near my doorstep. Some Sheeple can be super creepy.

Remona Blue said...

Mel said... 75
''...Actually, I think the beginning of her downfall was her interaction with the Palins. Something happened there that isn't being made public, IMO. My suspicion is that there was some sort of negotiation/agreement. TLC would end the show, and in exchange whoever from the Palin family/crew/secret service wouldn't go any further with what they saw. The way Kate's show ended had legal written all over it.''
~~~~~~~~~
I'm playing catch up here, so my thoughts have probably already been said. BUT, I do agree with you, I think that was the beginning of the end of KK. My speculation is that it involved some sort of 'incident' with Mady. Remember the photos of her sobbing, holding her shoulder?
*******
Mel said... 112
''...Although the first time I saw something I'd posted here being ripped apart and snarked on on another site, I have to admit I did feel, um, a wee bit defensive. Well, ok, a whole lot defensive.''
~~~~~
I also got ripped apart on another site due to my comments here, but I didn't feel at all defensive. I thought it was really funny! Kinda like Sally Field when she accepted her Oscar....but in reverse! Instead of ''you really like me'', I was loving that they ''really did NOT like me''!!!

Suze said...

Carrying this over from the previous thread. I'm always a day late noticing a new topic. (sorry Admin re processing this twice)

Suze said...

Re: Kate posting photos of the kids and referring to them as "my babies".

Of course. I think she's doing it intentionally and mentioning and linking to the cookbook because she is hoping to 'mist' the fans and potential buyers into remembering the kids as they were on tv - little and cute - not as the average looking elementary school aged kids they are now. Little and cute sells, average doesn't. This book will be another picture book, except this one hawked as a 'cookbook' hoping to draw from a greater pool of (unsuspecting and/or naive) buyers.

As for her not remembering where/when the pics were taken - they are obviously digital photos and she's just downloading the files so the date has to be available. But, how incredibly unappreciative and elitist thinking she is to have taken so many trips that meant so little and became so common that she can't remember where they were taken - let alone have any meaningful discussion with the kids about their experiences. I shudder to think that the kids have such vague memories and have placed the same blase value that their mother has on the fantastic opportunities the show provided them. Shameful and sad.

*****

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

Suze, I thought the comment about how she THINKS they were at a Taylor Swift concert to be particularly insensitive.

Most concerts these days charge an arm and a leg. Many people are lucky to take their kids to such a thing once in a lifetime if ever, much less many times as she has. It's nice that the biggest problems the 1% have are remembering whether you were at some 100 buck a head plus backstage passes Taylor Swift concert or not. Which reminds me, Taylor Swift and her mom were another "bestie" of Kate's that really never were. Once again the way she defines friendships and the way other people see the encounter are grossly distant from each other.

kids first said...

Her association with BV and threatening to sue anyone that looks at her wrong sure is gonns make any potential employer run the other way. Or possible dates for that matter.

Susie Cincinnati said...

Most concerts these days charge an arm and a leg. Many people are lucky to take their kids to such a thing once in a lifetime if ever, much less many times as she has. It's nice that the biggest problems the 1% have are remembering whether you were at some 100 buck a head plus backstage passes Taylor Swift concert or not

&&&&&&&&&

My jaw dropped at that one. Such a snotty attitude, like shrugging your shoulders saying, "I think it was at a concert, not sure, we've been to so many, you know, one just blurs into the next."

If she's making memories for these kids and she doesn't remember where those memories are made, then it's a sure bet that the kids, at ages three and four, aren't going to remember them either. How much of that fabulous ski vacation will they remember? Probably nothing, except for her melt down on the plane.

But you know, it's all about making memories, and providing the kids with those educational and fantastic opportunities to see the world.

Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said...

I think the bottom line is it was never about making memories, it was about using the kids so Kate could live a fantasy celebrity lifestyle that most little girls stop dreaming of by the time they are 14 and get real.

chefsummer said...

Concerts aren't cheap I only been to a few in my life.

But lets remember Kate's a millionaire so buying tickets for her isn't going to cost that much.

Susie Cincinnati said...

I don't care what branch of the service you were/are in, when you served, where you served. Everyone who has served this country (and their families) finds a comment like that BEYOND offensive.

&&&&&&
But that quote came from one of her alleged journals, which, of course, she most likely told BV was altered. BV is not going to believe anything Robert put out there.

Susie Cincinnati said...

Re Walt/Kelly - IIRC he said he would no longer post due to a lawsuit but it wasn't clear if he was bringing the suit or if he was being sued.
Or it could all be hogwash :)

&&&&&

If memory serves me (and most of the time it doesn't) one of the fans used her position (or her husband's) to access the database which should have been permitted only for who were licensed to access it. In other words, if they did this, they allegedly did it illegally. He verified that she (they) did this. She went private after that, changed her name, and I haven't seen her on Twitter, although she may be posting under a different name. I believe he went off Twitter and RWA because of a case he was building that was in the hands of law enforcement.

Susie Cincinnati said...

Fungirl, you say ECJ is nasty. Do you think it's nasty to mock someone who was the victim of brutal childhood rapes? Put yourself in her shoes. She was mocked daily & still is. It goes both ways.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Of course there are those who mock a non-fan because she watched her family being murdered (or something like that). I can't believe that adults would stoop to tormenting others like that. Both sides are guilty of trashing each other. ECJ, as well as other haters, made some really disgusting comments about Kate aborting her baby...this really was over-the-top and totally uncalled for. I remember reading some of that garbage and thinking, "WHY are you doing this?"

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 1236   Newer› Newest»