> Not all those posts were purged and you have
> simply rewritten history with this one. Some
> people questioned, some people disagreed and now
> you claim it to be much more than it actually was.
> You were not told you shouldn't question anything.
> You were told Flash had included links and quoted
> specific IRS regulations which contradicted your
> posts. When asked to provide information to
> support your assertions, you said you were going
> to research some items.
No, I'm not the one who rewrote history. You're rewriting it now. Go look at that thread. Every single post I made two years ago is gone. Flash's incorrect information stands unchallenged, and uncorrectable, at this point, because the thread is now locked. When I discovered that, I sent Jacob a letter detailing all of the inaccurate or outdated information in that thread and he made no response to my email and has let the thread stand. There were 22 corrections needed. Some of that information is 5 or 6 years old. Things have changed. That thread has not.
Flash did not include links to her source of information, at least not to the particular information I said was incorrect. In the original thread, I copied information right from the IRS website, but that wasn't good enough for you and wales. All you wanted to do was defend Flash, and cite some unnamed CPA who talked at one MS conference who told people what they wanted to hear, even though there was no reference to any IRS publication to back up what was said, and who was contradicted on that point by eight other CPA's another shopper questioned on the matter (her post was also purged from the thread).
The thing I said I was going to research I did research and the only IRS statement I found on the matter supported my position. I quoted that and you continued to argue with me. ("You" collectively, I don't remember who specifically was involved in that particular dogpile.)
Anyone who wants to know what in that thread is incorrect can PM me and I will send them what I wrote to Jacob and the details of all the errors I found in that thread -- a couple of which are repeated in several places.
(Flash, if you read this, it has never been my intention to criticize you for what you wrote. You never held yourself out as a tax expert; you were passing on information you believed was correct, and you hedged a lot of your comments with "I believe this is the case" and other comments indicating you were not claiming expertise. But while some of your advice was good, particularly about record keeping, a lot of it is either not true, not true any more, or true only under some circumstances. The tax code is very complex; there are numerous exceptions, and things change every year. Things that were advisable for you under your situation may be bad advice or even illegal for others. Things that were true in 2008 or 2009 are not true in 2014. Things you said cannot be done sometimes can be done.)
But you, Lisa, are ignoring my point: that I was viciously attacked and ridiculed on my first arrival here, just because I knew some things that the "old timers" didn't know, and they didn't like what I had to tell them. My point was about the ATTACK. Nobody even questioned whether maybe I was right and knew what I was talking about. One of your own was disagreed with, and you all ATTACKED.
Just like the attack that was launched on newcomer Tony Lorenzini, all because someone decided, in the total and complete absence of any proof whatsoever, that he was lying to us. Even after it was proven that he was not lying, the attackers continued to defend themselves, blaming Tony for not being more clear about his situation.
I stood up for Tony. I stood up for Erika. I have stood up for others who were ridiculed, called names, or called a liar here. (And thank you, Storm Cloud, for seeing that.) But because I have stood up for them against the "old guard" or whatever term we want to use for the early arrivers who now think they own the forum, I get attacked over and over again.
The reason I stand up for the attacked is because I know what that feels like, to come into this new place, excited about connecting with fellow shoppers, and the first words out of our mouth we're being called names and run out of town on a rail. Because that's what happened to me.
I read the preceding several posts with interest. I really think if everyone (myself included; I let some of you push my buttons too easily) makes a concerted effort to consider the hurtfulness of what they are inclined to dish out, and maybe consider that very few people actually post here with nefarious or malicious intentions and consider that maybe a request for clarification of what they meant might be better than ripping them a new one for what you think they meant, maybe some of this nastiness can finally stop.
It appears some of us want peace and harmony here. Joking around is one thing. Name calling and accusations of lying are quite another. Let's add a smiley face to the jokes so it is clear when we are joking. Let's stop calling people liars.
And please, let's be gentler with the newbies. All of them. Even the ones who dare to give us advice in their first post. They just might know what they're talking about.
I'm in favor of more moderation.
. . .Mary would want the entire post deleted and replaced with a mod note that said "Post deleted for personal attack". . .
Is that what you're debating?