Posted 3/16/10 at 3:58 PM:

Craigslist you have S.A.M.

A Self Appointed Moderator (I call her SAM) is telling people that their opinions are
irrelevant; calling them sniveling cowards (for using the hide feature) and discrediting
what they post based on what she calls “lack of proof” “lack of knowledge” and of
having personal agendas. She claims to know who posted what item. Great Crystal Ball
that! It was an act of intelligence to use the “Hide” feature. Good going poster!

She seems to be deliberately insulting and antagonistic. She seems to enjoy goading
people and as you can see this results in responses from the insulted Craigslist
Community who she then further infuriates by trying to humiliate them with taunts. She
is adept at meanness and mockery. Obviously enjoys debate although her logic makes no
sense. She has posted to more than one person to “shout it to the ocean” if they didn’t
like the flagging. At this moment her ego must be soaring because people are actually
responding directly to her.

She makes references to “craig” (see “Exhibit A”) implying that she has a personal
relationship with Craigslist management. She has done this many times before. She
obviously has no work schedule since she is often busy responding or flagging posters as
early as 2 a.m. One poster targeted pointed out that she flags throughout the course of the
day as well. Look at these times (this is moderate for her) you’ll get the idea:

Date: 2010-03-09, --- 10:21PM

Date: 2010-03-11, --- 7:59AM
Date: 2010-03-11, --- 9:52AM
Date: 2010-03-11, --- 12:11PM
Date: 2010-03-14, --- 2:16PM EDT

This woman is so full of animosity that the site is currently going toxic. My posts are a
special interest of flagging for her and she found it necessary to post directly referencing
my message and giving me a lecture. Is she actually giving me permission in her post to
put up my message as long as I don’t add my website address to it?! (see “Exhibit B”)
Oh, by the way to get background reference as to why I’m one of her targets read my
website: http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeyfg4f/kittycatfosterpitfalls it’s a learning
experience you won’t want to pass up – maybe one day I’ll write a book?

Anyway SAM has flagged, then lectured to the persons she flagged and on every topic
she flags she gives out admonishments along with permission for what and how things
should be posted on Craigslist. This woman resorts to legal jargon suggesting allegations
where none have been made and seems to enjoy playing the role of Judge and Jury. This
woman may be associated with the many petitions against the ACC and for replacement
of their Board.

I’m quoting the posts I was able to copy tonight, because she will deny she ever said it
unless it’s quoted outright. One person was flagged as I was opening the Message Board,
they promised to repost, I hope they do and that they use the Hide feature. At some point
with enough flagging CL will put your account on hold but if you are reviewed and it's ok
they'll remove the hold on your account and you can post again. Just don't post trash or
respond moronically.

***************************************************
“Exhibit A”

Blooper #1: She states: “Furthermore, rants and discussion are not consistent with the
stated purpose of the CL PETS board”
Hello, She is ranting and raving!

“RE: Corruption in the xxxx

Date: 2010-03-11, 12:11PM

“Whether you like the CL rules or not is irrelvant.

Posts alleging that organizations or city agencies are corrupt based on your uninformed
and uneducated assessment of their 501C filings is consdidered defamatory.

Craig pulled your post down. If you want to dispute his decision - contact him .

If you persist in posting ads such as this, I will continue reporting them to CL
Management. As you're well aware, if you persist in flagrantly violating CL terms of use,
you are likely to lose posting rights.

I'd like to further reiterate that you are not allowed to post links to personal websites in
ads. Furthermore, rants and discussion are are not consistent with the stated purpose of
the CL PETS board, The NYC Pets board is for rehoming pets. If you want to rant and
rave or express opinions, there is a discussion board for that. Your rants (excluding
defamatory posts) might be tolerated on the CL discussion boards for Pets.”

************************
Blooper #2: She states: “No point in engaging in meaningless conversation with this
individual and further cluttering the board with posts that do not belong here”
She is again ranting and raving and cluttering up the boards with posts that don’t belong
here.

“re: Re:CORRUPTION - XXXX (Upper East Side)

Date: 2010-03-11, 9:52AM

I honestly have no idea as to what this poster is suggesting. They are crying corruption.
That is what this poster does - she says eveyone is dishonest corrupt and greedy. There is
of course no solution offered by this individual. They just post defamatory ads and read
501c reports pretending to know how to read them... when in fact they are probably
unable to do more than open the reports since there is no evidence that they have any
accounting training. No point in engaging in meaningless conversation with this
individual and further cluttering the board with posts that do not belong here. I do agree
that the ACC is not the problem here. It is all the issues you name in your thoughtful post.
What I do know is that the post posted is defamatory and baseless in fact and they have
been reported appropriately.. I have learned long ago there is no reasoning with a stone.“

***********************************
Blooper #3: She states: “Despite the fact that you do not provide an email. your identity
is known. You are sadly mistaken if you think you can hide in anonymity.”
Later goes on to say,
“Despite your apparent lack of logic and sound reasoning, you are still accountable for
posting defamatory posts.”
Doesn't she realize she's guilty of what she herself charges?

“CORRUPTION - XXXXXXX (NCCS - )

Date: 2010-03-11, 7:59AM

“Be advised that your post has been sent to CL Management for review. Despite the fact
that you do not provide an email. your identity is known. You are sadly mistaken if you
think you can hide in anonymity.

Your posting is defamatory. It also lacks sound logic and reasoning.

If an agency has money for caring for animals -- that is providing for food and shelter and
staffing and bldg maintenance -- this does not mean that they can find homes for animals
in their care. Money does not purchase homes. Eventually they simply run out of space to
house the animals.

Your post is defamatory. WIthout substantiation, you are publically accusing two city
agencies of corruption by their mis-use of public monies. Despite your apparent lack of
logic and sound reasoning, you are still accountable for posting defamatory posts. I leave
this in the hands of CL Management. I have also sent your post to Mayor's Alliance as
well so they can decide how to proceed. “

*****************************************
Blooper #4: She states: “links to personal websites in CL posts are not permitted per
Terms of Use”
Ah, yes, the Website that exposes KittyKind’s Deception; Marlene Kess’ Flight from NJ
Justice and into the arms of her Park Slope friends to continue Business as Usual.

“Exhibit A”
“Ask Questions Before Fostering/Adopting
Date: 2010-03-09, 10:21PM
It is my understanding that links to personal websites in CL posts are not permitted per
Terms of Use.

If the community indulges you - you can "get away with" posting (and not overposting)
information posts not related to finding homes for pets/for rehoming pets. As you may be
aware, that is the stated purpose of the CL Pets board. Posts in violation of TOU run the
risk of being flagged.

http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/pet/1635862354.html
http://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/pet/1635857550.html

At the very least, you really do need to delete your personal website link in your posts.

You appear to be so concerned with assuring that others do the right thing - you might
consider doing likewise.

Here is the link to the CL Help Desk forum if you'd like to confirm this guideline.”

*********************************
Blooper #5: She states: “Why are you posting a defamatory heading on your ad? I
suggest you change your ad title or be flagged and reported to CL Management.”
Don’t Tell me this isn’t Censorship! And again, she admonishes the person for not
giving her an email box to send hate mail to. And again she’s ranting and raving and
posting inappropriately, even though “now she knows the rules of TOU.”

“ re: Re:CORRUPTION xxxx (NCCS - ) (Upper East Side)

Date: 2010-03-14, 2:16PM EDT

“Why are you posting a defamatory heading on your ad? I suggest you change your ad
title or be flagged and reported to CL Management.

My apologies for posting - I would have responded to this poster directly, but as usual,
this poster is anonymous with no email reach provided in their ad.”

Start watching her dates and times of posting, it’s kind of sad the amount of time she
devotes to sitting at the PC and attempting to assert control over the activities of strangers
outside of her apartment.

It’s important to let Craigslist Management know what is going on in the site – not to
micro manage an entity that you didn’t even create. The Blooper is not funny in this
case. Exposed on CL it will only be flagged by SAM who doesn’t bother using the Rants
& Raves sections herself. Others on CL have assured me that they have experienced this
same BLOOPER person (SAM) so she’s been around for awhile. Hope Craigslisters
continue to post despite the flagging, advise CL about SAM and occasionally write in my
guestbook at http://mysite.verizon.net/vzeyfg4f/kittycatfosterpitfalls.

You’ll find Charities Bureau Links; Questions to ask before fostering/adopting; free
forms to use and lists of what to look for in healthy Kittens. You’ll understand why I
sued KittyKind for Breach of Contract and how I know so much about Marlene Kess and
her treatment of people who fostered for her only to have cats abandoned in their homes
(part of the reason for my lawsuit).

People, I encourage you to

1. repost
2. use the Hide feature
3. report her to CL
4. send them copies of her post with her id numbers so they can track her

If you look at any of the boards across the various cities in CL you’ll see this is the only
one with a SAM on it. The other boards are doing fine as CL intended when they created
their site. If you are in the wrong CL Management will let you know it.

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

<b>Glad the following was posted - it connects with a lot of what I've been saying over
the past years. However, filing for a 501c does not take an eternity - it gets done fairly
quickly. My friend did it in 6 months it's worth the time and effort.

Filing a complaint with the Attorney General's office is recommended as is posting on

Commentsearch where the IRS and others can see what people are saying about these
groups. Yes, Grantmakers, the Attorney General and others look up orgs when
researching them for grants and get to see what the public has to say if it's posted
somewhere. Create a blog if you have to. Thank you for this concise message.</b>

“RE: WARNING! Through Their Eyes Rescue is NOT REPUTABLE! (Studio 54

Guest List only)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2010-03-16, 12:55PM EDT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m a “reputable” (I think) rescuer in the NYC area. I took notice of the post below. I
would like to exercise my first amendment right and make a commentary in response to
this. Please indulge me.

>>http://throughtheireyesrescue.org/about
>>http://pbrc.net/webapp/cgi-
bin/organization_detail.cgi/70022a613dad299e709ff7e12c2eb048?id=3450
>>They are NOT a registered 501C3 with the IRS so are NOT allowed to solicit
donations and they are NOT with the Mayor's Alliance as Andrea Sacco claimed on the
phone to get my donation.
>>http://www.AnimalAllianceNYC.org/aboutus/apos/atoz.htm
>>If you've also had a bad experience with them or any other Rescue Org, file a
complaint with the Attorney General's Office.
>>http://www.ag.ny.gov/resource_center/complaints/pdfs/comp_char.pdf
>>There are lots of good reputable Rescues out there but they are NOT one of them.
>>If you have contacts at the ACC, they will tell you the same.

A.) Not a 501?

Anyone that’s ever applied for 501 status will tell you, it’s a process that can be best
described as an exercise on patience. 1. it involves costly legal fees to incorporate, so
forth and so on. 2. You have to pay high fees when you file that range depending on your
budget projections. So it’s not free. Once you do file, you wind up in a "pending" stage
FOREVER. You wait, and wait, and wait and wait. Then you wait. And if you struggle, as
some of us do, to do your rescue work and try hard to make ends meet then perhaps the
rescuer is at a disadvantage and not at-glance noted. Maybe the money they have is best
put into animal food and vet care and none left for lawyers. We don’t know everything
that is behind the surface of a situation its best if we just ask the person why they don't
have a 501 set up and then try to help them get it done than to spend the time and energy
writing complaints about someone who is doing rescue work.

B.) NOT ALLOWED TO RECEIVE DONATIONS?

If you accept donations to conduct rescue work while not yet a 501 does not mean you’re
a bad person or not worthy of support… it just means you have to pay taxes on the
moneys received and the benefactor can’t claim it as a deduction when they file their
taxes at the end of the year. People don’t mind giving a little even if they don’t get cookie
points.

C.) NOT with the Mayors Alliance? (MA)

By virtue of being a member does not make you a Spartan of the rescue world. There are
some originations that I would not trust within an inch of my life. Please Miss Thang…
there are a few members that do nothing more than get paid by doing “dump adoptions.”
What’s a Dump Adoption? I’m glad you asked: let me break it down for you. For every
animal they extract from the ACC and adopt they get paid $200 from Medi’s Fund
through the Mayors Alliance. This motivates some to hand off the animals to the first
retarded Tom, Dick, or Harry that asks. This potentially places that same animal back in
the shelter system whence they came from because the applicant was not screened for
this potential mishap. MOTIVATION: The faster they get rid of these animals the sooner
they can go back and pick up more of them and repeat the process of collecting $200… if
you average 5 adoptions a week 5 X 200 = $1000 plus adoption fees of $100 to $150
you’re laughing all the way to the bank each week and most of the animals you adopt are
in the revolving door. This goes on daily and it’s perfectly “legitimate” and the
“adoption rate” gets a good high score and everyone on the political end of things is
commended for the numbers… Hello… these are animals we’re talking about NOT
STATS. These are some, NOT ALL of the members. Some have not yet sold out.

What of the well reputed and highly respected animal rescue organizations that ARE
NOT members of the MA, for example BARC? What say you? They were once a member
of the MA, but later withdrew. Why? Good question. …I wonder why? He asked,
knowingly. Do you have anything to say about this? If one is not a not members of the
MA… what does that mean? We should not donate support to them? It’s so black and
white? Members Yes, Non Members No and all fat women are Opera Singers, Jesus all
mighty, what’s up with that?

C.) HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE?

I’m having one now. I’m so glad I put away all the razor blades before I came online
today. I’ve also had experiences with people who donate with expectations. (a/k/a Purse
Strings) “No good deed goes unpunished” I don’t like quoting the Bible, but I found this
very apropos. Life is not fair. Apparently you can rescue animals but you will still have
to deal with people who for whatever reason want to throw us under the bus like the
“person” who wrote this post. This makes me want to write a sequel to the Bible. I will
call it “the Bibbly” why not?

D.) LOTS OF REPUTABLE ORGS ON THE LIST?

ok… so give us the “list” Who is on the list of “reputable” rescue organizations? And
why would the ACC provide a subjective statement about any organization? Do they like
to get sued for slander, and defamation of character? No… I don’t think so. The people
at the ACC are not idiots and they have a very tough job without having to provide
comfort and validation to nut jobs that call about your claim. There are no Studio 54 VIP
Lists in the Rescue World… we know that there are problems but we try to help animals
and sometimes we have to support the not so cool people associated with a situation
where the outcome will only impact the animal so we swallow the dirt handed to us for
the ultimate benefit will still be for the animal. Sure the people are not always great, but
how else can we have helped?

E.) THEORY:
whenever I see a post on CL like this one. I see nothing more than two cat/dog ladies
going at each other. Typically, they all feel they are the only ones on the planet that can
do a “proper” job of taking care of animals. Everyone else sucks. (If you’re lucky) And if
you happen to be doing adoptions in the general geographic area that they do their
adoptions a group of them in accord will flag your posts. That’s how you know they do
dump adoptions, they are not motivated by the cause we’ve all taken up, but the objective
of getting the adoptions done only through them for the payments. “