Thursday, July 06, 2006

Verisimilitude. It's more than just a big word.

From OlbermannWatch:

And then the zanies (all 3 of them) at Keitholbermann.org, who proudly proclaim they speak only positive things about their hero decided that such matters of important must be discussed in a newly created sock puppet forum entitled The Anonymous Rat solely designed to declare war on KarmaBites1, QT, and Olbermannwatch (her accomplicies in crime, don't you know).

And what was the great crime being committed here you ask? Why the attempt to bring down the Edward R. Murrow of our time. Yeah, seriously, that's what they think he is. The QT admin, showing a great example of Olbermann logic, then decided to delete her entire board. Way to show 'em: wipe yourself off the map.



No no. This blog was solely designed to publish my comments that karmabites1 kept deleting from her blog. I just want to know what's going on. I went away for the holiday, left the door open, and everyone came in and started throwing things at each other.

And I don't really have a problem with that other than being disappointed. I wanted to open a forum for discussion and debate on the karmabites1 situation, but it turned into some strange fandom war.

And as for that QT message board, they "went underground" once before, so no doubt they're still lurking about out there. They'll turn up eventually.

Yes, I am admittedly a sockpuppet, but I'm not a member of OW, KO.org, QT, DU, the ACLU, WWE, SCOTUS, or any other acronyms.

Turning now to the comments that Olbermann's silence is a sure sign of his guilt. I don't buy this. When he was at Fox News, he had to deal with a stalker. A woman claimed that he was sending her secret messages while on air (I don't know if that includes tapping the desk). I'm not an expert on stalkers, I'm not even an armchair psychologist, but isn't it common knowledge that stalkers are by definition off-kilter and usually take any kind of attention as good attention? Karmabites1 has displayed creepy behavior, so whether her story is true or not, it could be that Olbermann regards her as stalkerish. Having dealt with that sort of thing before, I doubt he would want to acknowledge her in any way.

As for my own opinion, I still haven't been able to come to a conclusion. It is completely possible that karmabites1 did meet Olbermann. It's possible that he wanted to have sex with her. Hell, it's possible that he wasn't able to "seal the deal" as it's been said. But why all the secrecy and censorship, karmabites1? Why delete or refuse to publish the comments that ask you real questions? Why do you only publish the supportive and obviously outlandish dissenting comments? What are you hiding?

Olbermann spoke about verisimilitude today on the Dan Patrick Show. He spoke about how you have to have context in order to come to any conclusion on the appearance of truth. It made me think of karmabites1. What was the context of the emails? How did it turn from fan/TV personality interaction to a "relationship"? How did the subject of meeting come about? Who brought that up? What was the nature of the meeting?

Many might argue that the answers to those questions are none of my business. I would usually agree, but I would point out to those people that karmabites1 put herself out there first. I would also point out that I am in no way suggesting that I'm entitled to the answers. But I am entitled to ask them.

34 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post. I agree that you are absolutely right in asking questions. She IS the one who is causing the doubt with the deleting, her selectiveness, and her tease.

Whatever the story is, it should have been kept private. If Karma chooses to be public, then she should face questions that may not be to her liking.

9:02 PM  
Blogger Hawaii said...

Wow Anon Rat, something normal and thoughtful of this subject. You may be the first. I am impressed and largely agree with what you say. Noone knows at the moment the context of this relationship, and it may be everything Karmabites1 says it is, and it may all be made up. Either way, it hardly warrants all this emotion from anyone other than Karma and Mr. Olbermann. I have also yet to figure out why this has devolved into "fan" (and I use this term loosely) warfare. Is Keith Olbermann so perfect that nothing he does can be suspect? Or is he so absolutely horrible that no one should ever withhold judgement on him? And whether you belive Karmabites1 or not, does it make any sense to make angry, vile comments in her blog or at other people's fansites? If you don't like what they say, just stay away from their blog. Vote with your mouse so to speak. Let's get some rationality back into this thing people.

9:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"No one knows at the moment the context of this relationship, and it may be everything Karmabites1 says it is, and it may all be made up."

Actually, there are most certainly people who understand the context of the situation perfectly. Lloyd Grove, for example, has seen the emails and made the judgment it was worth some ink in the daily news. My guess is he's seen something other than just the "Rita email" that made him feel that way.

And I'm guessing there are quite a few people out there who know for sure what really happened beyond just Karma and Olbermann.

And as for Olbermann's silence and what it means, I'll remind you to reference Mr. Olbermann's own logic regarding this kind of issue. It is Olbermann himself who makes the most salient argument about silence equating with guilt. For those Olberfans out there, you should know exactly what I'm talking about. Every time another althete gets accused of using steroids, threatens to sue and then does nothing, it is Olbermann who asserts the notion that the lack of legal action suggests something sinister.

It is Mr. Olberman himself who makes the strongest argument in favor of the notion that a lack of action is indicative of one's guilt.

9:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wouldn't consider Lloyd Grove to be a safe source. He seemed rather tabloidesque to me.

For all we've seen up to now, it would have been very easy for KB to fake. Grove prints partial e-mails, she copies them. He taps he desk, she latches on to it as a "sign."

9:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OLBER-TRIVIA QUIZ!!!

When someone punches upward at you, what is the clever, cynical and brilliant response?

12:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SILENCE!

Exactly!

And we have NO proof that "Lloyd Grove, for example, has seen the emails." Lloyd Grove NEVER made any kind of a statement that he had seen emailS, plural, from this "fan." The emailS, plural, he referred to were from the Olbermann haters egging Keith on.

Has no one asked themselves why Karma's blog has been around for so long and Grove has not touched her story?

Sorry, hawaii, but this is one of those times when conclusions can reasonably be drawn, and it has nothing to do with anyone being perfect.

4:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"For all we've seen up to now, it would have been very easy for KB to fake. Grove prints partial e-mails, she copies them."

Actually, as has been made clear previously, that's not true. Lloyd Grove only printed Olbermann's side of the email. Karma has made public her side of the conversation in the "Rita Email." The easy way to solve this is to simply ask Lloyd Grove if that's the email he saw and verified. If it is, how can you explain Karma knowing the other side of the conversation unless she's the one who gave him the email?

"Lloyd Grove NEVER made any kind of a statement that he had seen emailS, plural, from this "fan."

I didn't say he did, I was conjecturing based on my knowledge of how the business works. You always ask for substantiating information. I don't need Lloyd to tell me that he's seen other emails. It would be completely common place for Lloyd to ask to see other emails (under the promise not to publish the information...it's called "off the record") if he knew they existed. Karma has made it clear that other emails exist, so I say again I'm GUESSING Lloyd has seen other emails. And given that Karma has made this public, I'm GUESSING that there are many people in her circle of friends that have not only heard the story but seen ALL the evidence. So, back to my original point...there are most certainly people who understand the context of the situation.

"Has no one asked themselves why Karma's blog has been around for so long and Grove has not touched her story?"

Sure we have, and there's a relatively simple answer. There's no story for Lloyd to write other than the one he's already written...unless, of course, Karma is willing to give him more emails; which by the way just adds more evidence that lloyd is indeed a fairly responsible journalist.

4:52 AM  
Anonymous Cecelia said...

I'm interested in finding out the details of the woman who stalked Olbermann while he worked at FOX.
Specifically, how that situation was made public and whether Olbermann had obtained a restraining order.

The term "stalker" is fairly subjective and not solely influenced, but certainly influenced by... factors such as whether or not one appears on television...

Afterall, if I had a former classmate hire a private detective in order to find out "what became of" me... as Olbermann claims to have done... I'd consider myself stalked whether the classmate was a famous talking head or not...

10:06 AM  
Blogger ratón anónimo said...

Cecelia, I'm afraid that I said it happened while Olbermann was at Fox News, but it actually happened while he was at Fox Sports.

A quick Google search yielded this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11698322/

Now, to be fair, when I was at FOX Sports, I had a stalker, constant phone calls. There were trips, attempts to get into the studio. To their credit and with my everlasting thanks, they had a team in place to deal with this and they dealt with it very effectively. They dealt with it legally. They dealt with it even physically to intervene.

11:34 AM  
Anonymous Cecelia said...

If Olbermann felt bold enough to publicly air the fact that he had dealt with a stalker and to risk arousing the attention of his former stalker by mentioning that situation.... then it is noteworthy that he's refrained from characterizing Karmabites as a stalker.

11:42 AM  
Anonymous redtoots said...

Cecelia -

"If Olbermann felt bold enough to publicly air the fact that he had dealt with a stalker and to risk arousing the attention of his former stalker by mentioning that situation.... then it is noteworthy that he's refrained from characterizing Karmabites as a stalker,"

I'm sorry, but if one is being stalked the last thing that person should do is acknowledge the existence of the stalker. The reason he can discuss the Fox Sports stalker now is it is appparently safely in the past.

Whether the relationship between KO and this woman is what she said it was or as bad as her detractors are making it sound or as I suspect, something in between, he is withholding the one thing she is seeking: his attention.

Whatever the circumstances, silence is a smart move on his part.

12:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In order for Olbermann's stalker to no longer be a threat he/she must be behind bars or otherwise physically incapacitated, including dead.

In light of your argument that when dealing with such people silence is the smartest (not to mention safest?) option, your assumption about the relative harmlessness of Keith's former belle noir is especially puzzling.

12:14 PM  
Anonymous Cecelia said...

I said the above. Sorry.

12:30 PM  
Anonymous Pi said...

Anon. 12:14 said:
"In order for Olbermann's stalker to no longer be a threat he/she must be behind bars or otherwise physically incapacitated, including dead."

Or perhaps successfully treated for her mental illness.

"In light of your argument that when dealing with such people silence is the smartest (not to mention safest?) option, your assumption about the relative harmlessness of Keith's former belle noir is especially puzzling."

Not that I take it as gospel, but KB stated that a) she had difficulty getting time away from her job and b) a short trip to New York was a financial burden. If the woman is indeed in Miami with those restrictions, it's not a stretch for Olbermann to feel that she's not a physical threat nor a stalker. While it's a good bet she is/was operating under some delusions and feels the need to lash out, so far her actions have been impotent. Had she been able to inflict anything besides limited internet embarrassment on him, I'm sure she would have done so already.

12:31 PM  
Anonymous redtoots said...

OK, Anon 12:14, maybe the previous stalker is not in the past. Still, I think that his willingness to mention it publicly suggests that it is.

Silence is still the appropriate response to this woman. I don't think she really wants our attention. She wants his. The minute he gives it to her she has the control.

My assumptions about what to do about a stalker come from a reading of "The Gift of Fear" by Gavin De Becker, who consults with celebrities about stalkers but also offers services and advice to non celebrities. I admit, I read the book a several years ago, but his advice about never acknowledging a stalker directly has come to my mind during this whole business. I seem to recall that de Becker advises it is best to let law enforcement and private agencies like his to deal with the stalker.

His book on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0440226198/qid=1152300109/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-3407649-0255962?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Website for Gavin de Becker:
https://www.gavindebecker.com/index.cfm

12:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fact that you are so...as you say... "sure"... of those things that you cannot, in fact, know, undermines your concrete claim that it is most unwise to give stalkers the attention they crave by publicly acknowledging the situation.

12:47 PM  
Anonymous Cecelia said...

oops, did it again

12:48 PM  
Anonymous redtoots said...

cecelia,

I don't think I said I was "sure" about anything that has or hasn't happened between KO and KB. Everything that has been posted about her motives and actions or her motives and actions by you, me and everyone else is pure speculation.

But, not giving a stalker attention is not speculation. It is advice from the leading expert on how to deal with stalkers. I have provided you with links to the work of that expert.

People keep asking why if he is innocent he is silent. I'm simply speculating a possiblity as are you.

1:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am so glad someone mentioned Gavin deBecker. I was on the point of doing so myself.

DeBecker has a lot of excellent advice, and I believe everyone should read his books--especially women, and especially anyone with children they want to protect from predators.

4:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No no. This blog was solely designed to publish my comments that karmabites1 kept deleting from her blog. I just want to know what's going on. I went away for the holiday, left the door open, and everyone came in and started throwing things at each other.

And I don't really have a problem with that other than being disappointed. I wanted to open a forum for discussion and debate on the karmabites1 situation, but it turned into some strange fandom war.

And as for that QT message board, they "went underground" once before, so no doubt they're still lurking about out there. They'll turn up eventually.

Yes, I am admittedly a sockpuppet, but I'm not a member of OW, KO.org, QT, DU, the ACLU, WWE, SCOTUS, or any other acronyms.


BULLSHIT. If you're not Michael's sockpuppet, then why is he posting here almost constantly--always supporting your views? It's just a way to keep anything "bad" anyone may say about KO off his board, so when he saves KO by providing "evidence" for his defamaton case, he can say that no one on his board (that he wants so desperately and transparently to be #1 on Google) ever said anything bad about KO. Michael has a serious, stalker-like fascination with Olbermann that he should seek help for.

And what do you not get about QT being gone? It's GONE. Deleted. Irrevocably. No more QT. I wonder what a lot of the 6-hour-a-day, non-QT viewers are doing with their time. I hope they bought extra batteries for their vibrators, because they must be mighty frustrated.

And, really, this blog was just established to slam KarmaBites (check your early posts). Who appointed you the official web-scribe of the 2006 Olbermann scandal?

Listen, do yourself a favor. Shut this load of shit down and move on. You're just adding fuel to the fire that's gotten so out of control over this whole situation. If you think you're doing something useful or noble, reconsider.

8:16 PM  
Anonymous Cecelia said...

Redtoots,

I'm saying that you are making the HUGE assumption that the person who stalked Keith while he worked for FOX is "safely" in his past and that it is for this reason Keith felt it fine to bring the situation to public light.

You CANNOT know that. What you DO know for a fact is that the public found out that Olbermann had been stalked by a stalker of the sort that Olbermann had to be physically protected, because he, himself made that public. We have no idea if or why Olbermann no longer considers this person a threat.

But you have to make the assumption that Olbermann publicly revealed it because about this stalker is no longer a threat, in order to make the one that argues that Olbermann's silence about Karmabites is motivated by expert advice about not giving stalkers the attention they seek.

Again, you've made quite a lot of assumptions that go beyond the facts that we do know-- Olbermann had a stalker. Olbermann brought public attention to this stalker by telling his/her story. Olbermann has not commented upon Karmabites' accusation or addressed any of the publicity that has ensued from her charge.

If you're going to defend Olbermann's silence about Karmabites' accusation by arguing that she may be a stalker that Olbermann wisely avoids giving attention, then you're going to have to admit that unless his first stalker is dead, Olbermann did not act upon such expert advice.

There's a very valid contention that Olbermann remains mute because Karmabites is telling the truth about their relationship and that this is the attention and validation he'd rather she not receive.

That's just as much a possibility as your assumption. PERIOD

8:29 PM  
Blogger ratón anónimo said...

If you're not Michael's sockpuppet, then why is he posting here almost constantly--always supporting your views?

Because he's allowed to post here just like you are and everyone else is? Just because someone agrees with someone else, it doesn't mean they're the same person or in cahoots together. The internets is a big place.

Michael has a serious, stalker-like fascination with Olbermann that he should seek help for.

I've had as little contact with Michael as possible because, to be honest, he creeps me out a little. There's just something "off" about him, so I choose not to deal with him.

As I said, I'm not a sockpuppet of Michael's or Robert Cox's (equally creepy).

And what do you not get about QT being gone? It's GONE. Deleted. Irrevocably. No more QT.

QT is gone, but I'm sure the core group are still together somewhere. (A core group that I assume you're a member of. Psych101?) Maybe they decided to try something other than QuickTopic this time.

And, really, this blog was just established to slam KarmaBites (check your early posts).

I don't need to check the posts. I made them. The blog was established to publish the comments I was making to her blog that she deleted or refused to publish. I saw that night that other people were wondering what happened to my comments, so I wanted to put them up for people to see. And I had free time that night. :)

Who appointed you the official web-scribe of the 2006 Olbermann scandal?

Not a soul. I don't claim to be an official anything. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell is going on. Apparently other people are using this blog for the same thing.

If you think you're doing something useful or noble, reconsider.

I don't think I'm doing either. It's only useful in the sense that it gives me a place to post my thoughts on the subject.

8:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I appreciate that Raton is giving room to people who find Karma's claims rather dubious.

Cecelia: thanks for the comments you've left. I agree with the thoughts you wrote.

Everyone seems to think Lloyd Grove is such a positive in Karma's corner, but has anyone thought that she faked the e-mail to mimic what he posted? And the "tapping" e-mail, gee, couldn't she have watched her old copies of Countdown and then formed the e-mail?

She causes doubt about her own story by the constant revisions she does on her site. There was a "relationship," oh no, no "Relationship." She has contradicted herself many, many times.

8:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I appreciate that Raton is giving room to people who find Karma's claims rather dubious.

Cecelia: thanks for the comments you've left. I agree with the thoughts you wrote.

Everyone seems to think Lloyd Grove is such a positive in Karma's corner, but has anyone thought that she faked the e-mail to mimic what he posted? And the "tapping" e-mail, gee, couldn't she have watched her old copies of Countdown and then formed the e-mail?

She causes doubt about her own story by the constant revisions she does on her site. There was a "relationship," oh no, no "Relationship." She has contradicted herself many, many times.

8:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ratbitch--I'm not Psych101. Not everyone is Psych101. I do know her, but I'm not her.

And if you've lost interest, why not just pack this show up? Your opinions are hardly stellar and, as I wrote (and you did not address), all you're really providing is fuel for the fire--a place for warring Olbermann factions to continue the war--as if this entire infighting situation isn't ugly and ridiculous enough.

9:40 PM  
Blogger ratón anónimo said...

Ratbitch--I'm not Psych101. Not everyone is Psych101. I do know her, but I'm not her.

Ok, ok. I'm just working on all the other comments I've seen around. By the way, very clever play on words there with the "Ratbitch". Yep. Clever.

And if you've lost interest, why not just pack this show up?

Where on earth did you get the idea that I've lost interest?

Your opinions are hardly stellar

Nope. They're not. Judging by the comments around here, they're pretty common. Lots of people seem to be sharing them.

as I wrote (and you did not address), all you're really providing is fuel for the fire--a place for warring Olbermann factions to continue the war

I didn't adress this the first time because I wasn't sure what to say. My posts are not intended to fuel that fire, but I suppose they are. I'm not going to pack up just because some other people on the internets are using this blog for their own agendas.

as if this entire infighting situation isn't ugly and ridiculous enough.

Very very true. I've never quite understood why there has to be One True Fandom voice. Who gives a rat's ass (pun intended) that one person chooses to talk about this on their forum and someone else talks about that on their forum?

10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ratbitch is just a play on the epithet rat bastard--you know, the word that so offends Michael and his merry band.

This gave me the idea that you'd lost interest:

"Really, it's moot now. I don't think I'll waste my time on that anymore. I've made up my mind at this point that there's barely a speck of truth to what karmabites1 has been saying. I'm still curious about the situation, though. What drives someone to go to such lengths? What is she trying to accomplish?"

If you've made up your mind, what else is there to say? You've said it all--essentially, Karma is a liar, no matter what she posts, writes, or says. End of story. So you're still curious? Then just read her blog.

And regarding fueling the fire--if you want to keep this enterprise open, then why not restrict access? You'd have a better chance of denying people who have agendas the ability of using your space to further them. Or would that violation of free speech offend you?

10:14 PM  
Blogger ratón anónimo said...

you know, the word that so offends Michael and his merry band.

I guess I know now. That makes it so much more clever.

So you're still curious? Then just read her blog.

I'll still read her blog, obviously. But I'll keep this blog open because I'm sure she'll say things that I'd like to respond to. And I'm sure she won't publish those comments and I have just as much right as anyone to have my opinion heard, right?

You'd have a better chance of denying people who have agendas the ability of using your space to further them. Or would that violation of free speech offend you?

My point in starting this blog was to get my comments and opinions out there. The ones that karmabites1 deleted and refused to publish. It would be hypocritical of me to be selective to the commenters here when the reason for this blog's existence was someone else being selective of my comments.

Why does it bother you so much?

10:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It doesn't really, Jan. I just don't care to see the Olberloonies have another place to post their threats.

10:41 PM  
Anonymous Just Sayin said...

So, Karma is going to publish emails showing that not only was Olbermann responding to her and encouraging her to send revealing photos, but he was also doing so by suggesting that he would meet in her person if she continued to send photos.

That ought to make some people's heads explode around here. Of course, many of you will say the emails are faked.

How about this. Can we all agree that if Karma releases a series of emails from Olbermann suggesting that he was indeed encouraging the behavior and saying that he wanted to see her, and Olbermann does NOTHING, that it is highly likely it's because he can't defend himself against it?

I mean, how far does this woman have to go before your hero will finally defend himself against these unfair attacks? And if he isn't defending himself, what could the explanation possibly be?

Here's my prediction: Karma releases emails that make Olbermann look like a complete dork and a total asshole. Olbermann will do nothing. And he will do nothing because Karma can prove the emails came from his MSNBC email account.

6:17 AM  
Anonymous redtoots said...

Cecelia,

I'm offering one possible explanation of why he's silent. A stalker does not have to be dead in order to no longer be a threat. Someone else mentioned the possibility that perhaps the earlier stalker has received treatment and sometimes they just lose interest and move on.

Here's another reason for his silence. Right now, this mess is just one little corner of the Internet. It's not burning up the blogs that aren't exclusively devoted to KO either pro or anti. Except for the e-mail about Rita Cosby, none of this has hit mainstream media. Why should he bring attention to it by addressing it publicly?

And what does he need to address publicly? If this happened it all took place between two consenting unmarried adults. Why should KO or any of us have to defend our sex lives in public?

If what she says in true, at worst he was a jerk. That may be reprehensible but it is not a crime.

7:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At the very least, he used company email improperly. And if there's a morals clause in his contract, he's in trouble. I wonder how Dan Abrams feels about all this?

8:46 AM  
Anonymous redtoots said...

He misused company e-mail? Stop the presses! How do you know what NBC's policy is on personal e-mail use? I know lots of people who use their work e-mail for personal reasons

As for a morals clause? If it happened, two unmarried people had a consensual relationship. The quality or duration of the relationship or how it ends does not enter into any morals clause.

A morals clause usually applies to an arrest or other public scandal. I know you think this is a big deal, but it isn't outside this little corner of the Internet.

9:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now, seriously. People do get fired for misusing company email--and for lesser offenses. I can't imagine that NBC/GE doesn't have a pretty strict email use policy, particularly given the very public nature of their business. Now, if he used company email to solicit sex from fans, there's a big problem.

And that leads to the second point. Yes, it was a consensual meeting between adults. But this was a "celeb" using his "celebrity" to lure a fan to have sex using company email. And if he solicited pictures from her, it's worse yet--for him, not her.

I really doubt that MSNBC would fire him since he's their ratings king, but he could be punished in other ways. But the worst, most damaging punishment will probably be her revelation of his saying the Shakespeare line after intercourse. That will haunt him forever, may be what he's remembered for, and should be his epitaph. It's a more appropriate context.

3:10 PM  

<< Home