Re: LaVonne, where art thou? [Archive]

Doan

September 13th 03, 04:03 PM

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

> > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > have
> > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > >
> > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > >
> > > Ron
> > >
> > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> >
> > Doan
> >
> It's now over nine weeks!
>
> Doan
>
It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?

Doan

Doan

September 20th 03, 03:43 AM

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > have
> > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > >
> > > > Ron
> > > >
> > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > It's now over nine weeks!
> >
> > Doan
> >
> It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
>
> Doan
>
It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
debate??? ;-)

Doan

LaVonne Carlson

September 22nd 03, 12:24 AM

I responded to your post. If you want to play this game it only reveals your
refusal to debate.

LaVonne

Doan wrote:

> On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > have
> > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > >
> > > > Ron
> > > >
> > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > It's now over nine weeks!
> >
> > Doan
> >
> It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
>
> Doan

LaVonne Carlson

September 22nd 03, 12:25 AM

Still can't find the post where I responded?

Oops.

LaVonne

Doan wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> >
> > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ron
> > > > >
> > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> >
> > Doan
> >
> It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> debate??? ;-)
>
> Doan

Doan

September 22nd 03, 04:38 AM

Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)

Doan

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

> Still can't find the post where I responded?
>
> Oops.
>
> LaVonne
>
> Doan wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > >
> > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ron
> > > > > >
> > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> > debate??? ;-)
> >
> > Doan
>
>

Doan

September 22nd 03, 04:39 AM

Please repost. I, and anyone else for the fact, have seen your post.

Doan

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

> I responded to your post. If you want to play this game it only reveals your
> refusal to debate.
>
> LaVonne
>
> Doan wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> >
> > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ron
> > > > >
> > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> >
> > Doan
>
>

Doan

September 24th 03, 06:12 AM

I guess the truth is there is now post. It is now going 12 weeks!

Doan

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

> Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)
>
> Doan
>
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
>
> > Still can't find the post where I responded?
> >
> > Oops.
> >
> > LaVonne
> >
> > Doan wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ron
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> > > debate??? ;-)
> > >
> > > Doan
> >
> >
>
>

Doan

September 29th 03, 11:32 PM

It is now 13 weeks!

Doan

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

>
> I guess the truth is there is NO post. It is now going 12 weeks!
>
> Doan
>
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> > Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)
> >
> > Doan
> >
> > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
> >
> > > Still can't find the post where I responded?
> > >
> > > Oops.
> > >
> > > LaVonne
> > >
> > > Doan wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ron
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > > > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> > > > debate??? ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Doan

October 6th 03, 02:48 AM

Make that 14 weeks. :-)

Doan

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

> It is now 13 weeks!
>
> Doan
>
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> >
> > I guess the truth is there is NO post. It is now going 12 weeks!
> >
> > Doan
> >
> > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> >
> > > Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
> > >
> > > > Still can't find the post where I responded?
> > > >
> > > > Oops.
> > > >
> > > > LaVonne
> > > >
> > > > Doan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ron
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > > > > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> > > > > debate??? ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Fern5827

October 6th 03, 03:16 AM

Ah, well you must understand, Doan, she is crossposting my legitimate posts to
aps to ascps.

Since she can't answer you coherently without resorting to AD HOMS, she is
making rude postings.

I have a great reference regarding Dr. Elizabeth Gershoff having been spanked
in her youth.

Must dig it out for you.

Doan who has asked the one remaining poster on this NG (one who started posting
here early) a legitimate query:

>Subject: Re: LaVonne, where art thou?
>From: Doan
>Date: 10/5/2003 9:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Make that 14 weeks. :-)
>
>Doan
>
>On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
>> It is now 13 weeks!
>>
>> Doan
>>
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > I guess the truth is there is NO post. It is now going 12 weeks!
>> >
>> > Doan
>> >
>> > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>> >
>> > > Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)
>> > >
>> > > Doan
>> > >
>> > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Still can't find the post where I responded?
>> > > >
>> > > > Oops.
>> > > >
>> > > > LaVonne
>> > > >
>> > > > Doan wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
>> > > > > > > > >
...
>> > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted
>"studies that
>> > > > > > > > > have
>> > > > > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged
>her to debate me
>> > > > > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to
>take me on?
>> > > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty
>accusations from
>> > > > > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Doan
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > Doan
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours,
>thinking that it
>> > > > > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she
>was thinking.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Ron
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Doan
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > It's now over nine weeks!
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Doan
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak
>that it
>> > > > > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Doan
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted
>to
>> > > > > debate??? ;-)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Doan
>> > > >

Take a look at Website for CPS problems.

http://www.CPSWatch.com

Doan

October 14th 03, 07:18 AM

Going to week number 15!

Doan

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Doan wrote:

> Make that 14 weeks. :-)
>
> Doan
>
> On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> > It is now 13 weeks!
> >
> > Doan
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I guess the truth is there is NO post. It is now going 12 weeks!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Still can't find the post where I responded?
> > > > >
> > > > > Oops.
> > > > >
> > > > > LaVonne
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ron
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > > > > > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> > > > > > debate??? ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Byron Canfield

October 14th 03, 09:12 AM

"Doan" > wrote in message
...
>
> Going to week number 15!
>
> Doan
>

Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.

--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

Doan

October 14th 03, 09:37 PM

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Byron Canfield wrote:

> "Doan" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Going to week number 15!
> >
> > Doan
> >
>
> Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
> Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
> your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.
>
Yup! That seems to be the best that the anti-spanking zealotS can do! :-)
I gave them chances after chances to defend their position and their
precious "pee-reviewed" studies and all they can do is run and hide. It
must be fun running around with no clothes on. Maybe if they cover their
eyes and ears, they can pretend they are the Emperor and dictate to others
how to parent! :-)

Doan

LaVonne Carlson

October 15th 03, 02:00 AM

Byron Canfield wrote:

> "Doan" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Going to week number 15!
> >
> > Doan
> >
>
> Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
> Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
> your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.

I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.

LaVonne

>
>
> --
> "There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
> those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
> -----------------------------
> Byron "Barn" Canfield

Byron Canfield

October 15th 03, 06:04 AM

"Doan" > wrote in message
...
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Byron Canfield wrote:
>
> > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > Going to week number 15!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> >
> > Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill
filter.
> > Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies
to
> > your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so
appropriate.
> >
> Yup! That seems to be the best that the anti-spanking zealotS can do! :-)
> I gave them chances after chances to defend their position and their
> precious "pee-reviewed" studies and all they can do is run and hide. It
> must be fun running around with no clothes on. Maybe if they cover their
> eyes and ears, they can pretend they are the Emperor and dictate to others
> how to parent! :-)
>
> Doan
>
No, you flatter yourself; they just grow bored with you.

--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

Byron Canfield

October 15th 03, 06:04 AM

"LaVonne Carlson" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Byron Canfield wrote:
>
> > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > Going to week number 15!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> >
> > Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill
filter.
> > Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies
to
> > your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so
appropriate.
>
> I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
> around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him
to my
> kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
> point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate.
His
> diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and
letting
> doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.
>
> LaVonne
>
Cleaning rusty used nails would be a better use of your time. :)

--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

Doan

October 15th 03, 07:23 AM

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

>
>
> Byron Canfield wrote:
>
> > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > Going to week number 15!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> >
> > Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
> > Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
> > your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.
>
> I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
> around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
> kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
> point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
> diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
> doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.
>
This is very funny. :-) This is the same LaVonne that said she has who
challenged to me to debate her not long ago. This is also the same
LaVonne who said she has responded to my weeks a few weeks ago. This is
the same LaVonne who lied about me havingg children taken away by CPS!
What next, LaVonne? ;-)

Doan

Kane

October 16th 03, 03:57 AM

Doan > wrote in message >...
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Byron Canfield wrote:
> >
> > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Going to week number 15!
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > >
> > > Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
> > > Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
> > > your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.
> >
> > I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
> > around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
> > kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
> > point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
> > diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
> > doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.
> >
> This is very funny. :-) This is the same LaVonne that said she has who
> challenged to me to debate her not long ago. This is also the same
> LaVonne who said she has responded to my weeks a few weeks ago. This is
> the same LaVonne who lied about me havingg children taken away by CPS!
> What next, LaVonne? ;-)
>
> Doan

Look at the puppy with his own **** on his nose. Isn't that cute...r r r r

Stoneman

Doan

October 16th 03, 07:53 PM

On 15 Oct 2003, Kane wrote:

> Doan > wrote in message >...
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Byron Canfield wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Going to week number 15!
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
> > > > Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
> > > > your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.
> > >
> > > I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
> > > around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
> > > kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
> > > point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
> > > diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
> > > doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.
> > >
> > This is very funny. :-) This is the same LaVonne that said she has who
> > challenged to me to debate her not long ago. This is also the same
> > LaVonne who said she has responded to my weeks a few weeks ago. This is
> > the same LaVonne who lied about me havingg children taken away by CPS!
> > What next, LaVonne? ;-)
> >
> > Doan
>
> Look at the puppy with his own **** on his nose. Isn't that cute...r r r r
>
> Stoneman
>
LOL! A typical response from another "never-spanked" boy! What is this
fascination you and Steve have with "sh*t"? ;-)

Doan

Doan

October 16th 03, 07:59 PM

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Byron Canfield wrote:

> "Doan" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Byron Canfield wrote:
> >
> > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Going to week number 15!
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > >
> > > Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill
> filter.
> > > Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies
> to
> > > your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so
> appropriate.
> > >
> > Yup! That seems to be the best that the anti-spanking zealotS can do! :-)
> > I gave them chances after chances to defend their position and their
> > precious "pee-reviewed" studies and all they can do is run and hide. It
> > must be fun running around with no clothes on. Maybe if they cover their
> > eyes and ears, they can pretend they are the Emperor and dictate to others
> > how to parent! :-)
> >
> > Doan
> >
> No, you flatter yourself; they just grow bored with you.
>
I don't! I don't claim to have a Ph.D., teach math at a college level,
a member of MESA.... ;-) I am just a little boy who pointed out that
the anti-spanking emperor has no clothes! And, in some cases, he didn't
even have a penis! :-)

Doan

Doan

October 18th 03, 08:34 PM

It is now 16 weeks!

Doan

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Doan wrote:

>
> Going to week number 15!
>
> Doan
>
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Doan wrote:
>
> > Make that 14 weeks. :-)
> >
> > Doan
> >
> > On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> >
> > > It is now 13 weeks!
> > >
> > > Doan
> > >
> > > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I guess the truth is there is NO post. It is now going 12 weeks!
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Still can't find the post where I responded?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Oops.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > LaVonne
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Doan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "Doan" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
> > > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
> > > > > > > > > > > > > LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
> > > > > > > > > > > was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Ron
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It's now over nine weeks!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
> > > > > > > > cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
> > > > > > > debate??? ;-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Doan
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Greg Hanson

October 25th 03, 03:29 AM

LaVonne wrote
> I've responded to doan for more years than I care to
> remember. He's been around alt.parenting.spanking
> for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
> kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any
> more. There is little point. He appears incapable
> of engaging in rational discussion or debate.

If those are your standards, have you killfiled yourself?

Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.

The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
posted instantaneously.

Doan sometimes shows some language trouble, but
seems to hold salient facts in his head much more
effectively than you do.

You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.

Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
as rational or scientific discourse.

Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.

Come on out and debate Doan.

Doan

October 25th 03, 04:59 AM

a123sdg321

On 24 Oct 2003, Greg Hanson wrote:

> LaVonne wrote
> > I've responded to doan for more years than I care to
> > remember. He's been around alt.parenting.spanking
> > for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
> > kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any
> > more. There is little point. He appears incapable
> > of engaging in rational discussion or debate.
>
> If those are your standards, have you killfiled yourself?
>
> Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
> devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.
>
> The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
> and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
> of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
> self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
> posted instantaneously.
>
> Doan sometimes shows some language trouble, but
> seems to hold salient facts in his head much more
> effectively than you do.
>
> You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
> and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
> refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.
>
> Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
> as rational or scientific discourse.
>
> Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
> No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.
>
> Come on out and debate Doan.
>
She CANNOT debate with me on scientific ground because she
knows deep down that none of her studies can stand up to
scientific scrutiny. She only pretended that she wanted
to debate and when she knows that she is about to lose
the debate, she ran! Just take at her post on Aug. 25, 03:

"Like you, Steve, I have major doubts that Doan has read the studies he's
debated, but he may have. I don't know. He just challenged me on a
Straus et.al study. I asked him to post a reference and his evidence for
his claim. Let's see what he can do!"
LaVonne

When I pressed her on it, she ran! She knows she can't win because even
the authors of the study, Straus et al. had to capitulate:

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

and

"Straus, for example, has made explicit the fact that his research is
motivated by secular humanism. This includes a deeply held belief that
good ends should not be sought by bad means; that all forms of interpersonal
violence, including spanking, are wrong, even when motivated by love and
concern; and that we therefore need to develop nonviolent methods of
preventing and correcting antisocial behavior. These deeply held values may
account for the failure of Straus to perceive the serious limitation of
measuring CP using a 1-week reference period."
(ARCHIVES, In Reply. March 1998)

Doan

LaVonne Carlson

October 29th 03, 02:00 AM

Greg Hanson wrote (to me):

>
> Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
> devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.

I've provided scientific data, Greg. Over the years I have provided
references to many studies spanning several decades, none of which show
spanking to be more effective in the long term than alternative
disciplinary strategies. Many do not show spanking preferable to
alternative strategies, even short term. In the research, spanking
consistently correlates positively with long-term negative outcomes.
Both child development research and research on parental discipline
practices clearly identifies strategies which are most likely to help
children learn, grow and develop and that do not carry the risks
associated with spanking. You could do some research, Greg, if previous
ng posts are not archived. If you would like me to once again begin
posting references, please indicate. This is very time consuming if you
are not going to take the time to look up the studies and read the
scientific data.

And yes, I continue to make an emotional plea for the protection of
children. I make no apologies for emotional pleas to provide children
the parenting they deserve, and the protection from physical assault
that every adult in this society enjoys.

> The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
> and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
> of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
> self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
> posted instantaneously.

You post no proof for your claims, Greg. You post anecdotes and
propaganda. Show me scientific data.

> You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
> and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
> refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.

The "Sweden stuff" as you call it, was not disproven, Greg. Until you
can define "Sweden stuff" and provide research evidence that the "Sweden
stuff" has been completely disproven I will continue to refer to studies
which have shown the effectiveness on many levels of Sweden's legal ban
on spanking children.

> Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
> as rational or scientific discourse.

No, they are not. I have a personal opinion about the ethics
surrounding the practice of legal assaulting children in the name of
discipline. I have a wealth of peer-reviewed, published research
studies that not only fail to identify any benefit to spanking over
alternative, positive parenting strategies, but that consistently and
positively correlate spanking with potential long-term harm.

You do seem to be quite emotional about this whole CPS issue, and have
yet to provide a reference to a peer-reviewed and published research
study that supports your many opinions which you state as fact.
Projection is an interesting thing, isn't it?

> Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
> No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.

I don't hide from doan. I have spent many years debating doan before
you were involved in alt.parenting.spanking. I have listened to doan's
abuse and doan's consistent distortion. I now choose to spend my time
more wisely. You are a relative newcomer to alt.parenting.spanking.
I've been on this ng since the mid 1990's. If you do not know the
history, be careful with your challenges.

LaVonne

>
>
> Come on out and debate Doan.

Doan

October 29th 03, 05:25 PM

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

> Greg Hanson wrote (to me):
>
> >
> > Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
> > devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.
>
> I've provided scientific data, Greg. Over the years I have provided
> references to many studies spanning several decades, none of which show
> spanking to be more effective in the long term than alternative
> disciplinary strategies.

Then show us one study in which your non-cp alternatives are any better.
Let me remind you, and others who are interested, that in Straus &
Mouradian (1998), the CORRELATION between ASB and non-cp alternatives
are even stronger than spanking. You and Chris have been running
from debating since I brought this up. Why is that?

> Many do not show spanking preferable to
> alternative strategies, even short term. In the research, spanking
> consistently correlates positively with long-term negative outcomes.
> Both child development research and research on parental discipline
> practices clearly identifies strategies which are most likely to help
> children learn, grow and develop and that do not carry the risks
> associated with spanking. You could do some research, Greg, if previous
> ng posts are not archived. If you would like me to once again begin
> posting references, please indicate. This is very time consuming if you
> are not going to take the time to look up the studies and read the
> scientific data.
>
Then, this is your chance to defend those "scientific data", LaVonne.
For example, in Straus et al. (1997), how is it that the children who
were spanked less than once a week showed a DECREASE in ASB from t1 to
t2? Isn't that a BENEFIT? Why did Straus want to pass this group (56% of
the sample) as a "NON-SPANKED" group? When Dr. Larzelere pointed this
out to him, he had to capitulate:

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently. Although that is a plausible
interpretation, data from another study enable us to investigate
this issue by classifying spanking as "never" or "not in the past 6 months,"
or the frequency of corporal punishment (CP) in the previous 6 months.[1] "

[1] -This is the Straus & Mouradian (1998) study, which we now know
that the correlation between non-cp and ASB is even stronger for non-cp!

> And yes, I continue to make an emotional plea for the protection of
> children. I make no apologies for emotional pleas to provide children
> the parenting they deserve, and the protection from physical assault
> that every adult in this society enjoys.
>
And that is where your problem lies! LOTS of EMOTION but NO LOGIC!
Do you know that the police still carry BATONS??? ;-)

> > The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
> > and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
> > of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
> > self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
> > posted instantaneously.
>
> You post no proof for your claims, Greg. You post anecdotes and
> propaganda. Show me scientific data.
>
If you pull your head out of the anti-spanking sand, perhaps you
will see it! ;-)

> > You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
> > and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
> > refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.
>
> The "Sweden stuff" as you call it, was not disproven, Greg. Until you
> can define "Sweden stuff" and provide research evidence that the "Sweden
> stuff" has been completely disproven I will continue to refer to studies
> which have shown the effectiveness on many levels of Sweden's legal ban
> on spanking children.
>
LOL! Shall I post the study by Dr. Larzelere again, LaVonne?

> > Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
> > as rational or scientific discourse.
>
> No, they are not. I have a personal opinion about the ethics
> surrounding the practice of legal assaulting children in the name of
> discipline. I have a wealth of peer-reviewed, published research
> studies that not only fail to identify any benefit to spanking over
> alternative, positive parenting strategies, but that consistently and
> positively correlate spanking with potential long-term harm.
>
If this is true, it is easy to show that your non-cp are better under the
same condition. I have challenged you for years on this. All you can
do so far is run, hide and lies about me, LaVonne. Why is that?

> You do seem to be quite emotional about this whole CPS issue, and have
> yet to provide a reference to a peer-reviewed and published research
> study that supports your many opinions which you state as fact.
> Projection is an interesting thing, isn't it?
>
> > Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
> > No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.
>
> I don't hide from doan. I have spent many years debating doan before
> you were involved in alt.parenting.spanking. I have listened to doan's
> abuse and doan's consistent distortion. I now choose to spend my time
> more wisely. You are a relative newcomer to alt.parenting.spanking.
> I've been on this ng since the mid 1990's. If you do not know the
> history, be careful with your challenges.
>
More accusation against me, LaVonne? It's time for you to prove it!
Come on, LaVonne. Put up or shut up!

Doan

> LaVonne
>
> >
> >
> > Come on out and debate Doan.
>
>

Ron

October 30th 03, 04:00 PM

"Doan" > wrote in message
...
(Snip)

> > > Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
> > > No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.
> >
> > I don't hide from doan. I have spent many years debating doan before
> > you were involved in alt.parenting.spanking. I have listened to doan's
> > abuse and doan's consistent distortion. I now choose to spend my time
> > more wisely. You are a relative newcomer to alt.parenting.spanking.
> > I've been on this ng since the mid 1990's. If you do not know the
> > history, be careful with your challenges.
> >
> More accusation against me, LaVonne? It's time for you to prove it!
> Come on, LaVonne. Put up or shut up!
>
> Doan
>
> > LaVonne

She does seem to be doing quite a bit of dodging here. Just as she dodged
my post stating that all of the studies she cites are short term.

If Strauss and Larzelere are the basis for her belief's, and they have been
shown to be such frauds, what does she have left? Usenet proves nothing,
except where the holes in one's pet theories are. I'd say that LaVonne has
some patching to do.

Ron

Greg Hanson

November 1st 03, 01:37 PM

> And yes, I continue to make an emotional plea for the protection of
> children. I make no apologies for emotional pleas to provide children
> the parenting they deserve, and the protection from physical assault
> that every adult in this society enjoys.

Protection like the Jackson adoptee boys got recently?
Like the Wallis Family got? Wallis v. Escondido
Like the Dupuy Family Got in Illinois? (Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer)
Like the Christine family got?
How about the protection that Logan Marr got?
Or Shelby Duis?
Or the adoptee boy the Boss family buried in their basement?

Half of all Child Abuse Deaths occur in Foster Care.

Foster care are TEN TIMES more likely to be sexually abused there.

> > The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
> > and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
> > of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
> > self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
> > posted instantaneously.
>
> You post no proof for your claims, Greg.
> You post anecdotes and propaganda. Show
> me scientific data.

Do you have newsreader trouble, LaVonne?

I posted an AP report proving all 50 failed audits.
I asked you if that was sufficient proof, in that thread.
If you wish to refute that blatant proof, please do so
in that thread, the one where you have fallen silent.

If you want statistics, you might want to look at my
question I posted there asking WHY US DHHS doesn't
feature the 50 state failure PROMINENTLY on the clearing
house web site? Seems like selective reportage!

> > You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
> > and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
> > refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.
>
> The "Sweden stuff" as you call it, was not disproven, Greg. Until you
> can define "Sweden stuff" and provide research evidence that the "Sweden
> stuff" has been completely disproven I will continue to refer to studies
> which have shown the effectiveness on many levels of Sweden's legal ban
> on spanking children.

Save everybody some time. Ask Kane. He MORE than admitted it.

Perhaps, Professor Carlson has been RESTING ON HER LAURELS too long?

> > Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
> > as rational or scientific discourse.
>
> No, they are not. I have a personal opinion about the ethics
> surrounding the practice of legal assaulting

Whoa! Your ethics don't support the rule of LAW??

children in the name of
> discipline. I have a wealth of peer-reviewed, published research
> studies that not only fail to identify any benefit to spanking over
> alternative, positive parenting strategies, but that consistently and
> positively correlate spanking with

> potential
Ding Ding Ding!

> long-term harm.
>
> You do seem to be quite emotional about this whole
> CPS issue, and have yet to provide a reference to
> a peer-reviewed and published research study that
> supports your many opinions which you state as fact.

"There's them whats doin it and them what talks about it."
You asked for proof on the 50 state failed audits.
I posted it, and waffles posted another source.
You stopped posting in that thread suddenly.
But you started up another new thread mocking me.
Should I reciprocate?

When was the last time you sat in on an entire trial?
When was the last time you recorded and transcribed
a call to a caseworker because you knew without question
that she was going to be a complete rag on the phone?

When was the last time you had to have a "supervised visit"
with your daughter even though there is no legal or
any justification for the expenditure or intrusion
of "supervised" visits?

> Projection is an interesting thing, isn't it?
I just answered this identical question in another thread.
Look for the words "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

> > Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
> > No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.
>
> I don't hide from doan. I have spent many years debating doan before
> you were involved in alt.parenting.spanking.

Tell it to the payroll clerk or union rep. Seniority counts there.

> I have listened to doan's abuse and doan's consistent distortion.
> I now choose to spend my time more wisely.

I've seen people do this before, spend 20 minutes making excuses
why they shouldn't to a 5 minute job.

> You are a relative newcomer to alt.parenting.spanking.
> I've been on this ng since the mid 1990's.

SO WHAT? Resting on your laurels?

> If you do not know the history, be
> careful with your challenges.

Or what?
You'll make Frank send me more Gigabytes of SPAM each day?

You never acknowledge or refuted the proof that I have posted.
Did you just get that glossy deer in the headlights stare?

Are you the one they used to call "LaMoron"?
Feeling like you've been had yet?