So if this boils down to "Nobody can be certain, but everybody is entitled to his opinion without necessarily being a bad person" this should have been worth 1000+ postings.

Lsherm: A better update, not that it's going to help clear anything up. It just gives more detail about why they said they weren't ruling out a hoax. No, it doesn't involve any new information:

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120725/NEWS/707259886/1685

Also, the only thing that seems amiss that has been verified is that there weren't any signs of forced entry, but she said her doors were locked. However, if her landlord was in on it, or it was someone she knew/gave a key to, then it would follow there wouldn't be signs of forced entry. Or maybe they went in through a window that was open. That doesn't really mean anything, just that it would be nice if someone had kicked a door down.

Occam's Razor. This is open to interpretation because it's often quoted as "the simplest explanation is correct". The difficult logic is where you have a choice of explaining something as "the person had a hidden mental condition clouding his judgment, the medical tests were misinterpreted, the cows were disembowled by coyotes and the wounds looked unusual for other reasons" versus "it's ALIENS!" On the surface, the latter seems simpler, but it's not. It disregards all the complicated conditions and motivations for aliens to do this, and starts from a supposition that some world-changing event- the visitation of aliens- has happened, which is not demonstrably impossible, but it is a huge burden on the theory's simplicity.

Occam's Razor really doesn't substitute for good judgement though, in fact it requires it. The key here is that mysterious 3 "masked men" nobody else saw, in broad daylight, carrying out a bizarre "hate crime" which seems to be a relatively superficial injury for all the trouble they went to, and set a fire that did nothing.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's a lot of strange things- well, all of it- here, and no evidence that CAN'T be explained by "self-inflicted hoax".

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: RatOmeter: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: So, if I'm putting two and two together...

If you're right, then this person is very, very messed up and it is very, very likely that it was staged or at least not at all as reported. Also likely that any "help" she gets will continue to be an uphill battle.

Witness and acquaintance descriptions of a sweet and helpful person don't seem to match, though. Still gonna have to wait for official determination.

Well, based on the age difference between the reported victim and the person in the blog, I may have been wrong to connect those dots... but yeah, I hope more info comes out soon to settle the debate.

The blog mentioned more than one person. It was talking about a circle of meth heads that steal and do a bunch of other dishonest crap. The age doesn't match the person you were thinking of, so it must be one of the others mentioned. The more i hear about this, the more I'm now thinking it's a hoax too. Especially now that I know the person appears to be a meth addict. I've dealt with too many meth heads in the past to know they will lie and fabricate shiat without a second thought.

Saberus Terras: 2wolves: EmmaLou:

EIP. Would appreciate any further info.

Take care & be well.

Same here. Keep those of us that give a damn posted.

I'm assuming that by most likely being nothing more than a former coworker of the "victim" she isn't privy to any information that isn't readily available to the rest of us. But go ahead and continue giving her the attention she's apparently looking for. To be clear I had no problem with her until she got all high and mighty with another poster for daring to float an idea during such a tough time for her before it was revealed that she most likely has nothing to do with this incident.

Oznog: Occam's Razor really doesn't substitute for good judgement though, in fact it requires it. The key here is that mysterious 3 "masked men" nobody else saw, in broad daylight, carrying out a bizarre "hate crime" which seems to be a relatively superficial injury for all the trouble they went to, and set a fire that did nothing.

The police were called at 4AM. That's not broad daylight.

Again, Occam's razor: you hear about a crime on the Internet and the facts don't add up. Which is a simpler explanation, that the crime was a hoax, or that Internet people screwed up some of the facts?

2wolves: MoeSzyslak: Saberus Terras: 2wolves: EmmaLou:

EIP. Would appreciate any further info.

Take care & be well.

Same here. Keep those of us that give a damn posted.

I'm assuming that by most likely being nothing more than a former coworker of the "victim" she isn't privy to any information that isn't readily available to the rest of us. But go ahead and continue giving her the attention she's apparently looking for. To be clear I had no problem with her until she got all high and mighty with another poster for daring to float an idea during such a tough time for her before it was revealed that she most likely has nothing to do with this incident.

That's your opinion and you should revel in it. I'm seeking more information before praising or condensing anyone.

It's beyond opinion at this point and was made pretty abundantly clear last night. That's all I'm going to say about it in hopes of avoiding the ban hammer.

/sympathy troll be trollin'

2wolves: EmmaLou:

EIP. Would appreciate any further info.

Take care & be well.

Also ... BIE?

EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.

I don't understand this post EmmaLou. Upthread you claimed to be the actual living breathing person behind the Fark account that submitted this headline and linked it to the purported news article. Give me the benefit of the doubt for a moment here, I believe over 99% of all Farkers know how that Fark submission and anonymous association works.

And now you want us to believe that some other "subby has been posting" separate from the Fark nickname who posted "around midnight" and is representing someone else.

Then you say that yourself, as the submitter, submitted the news article and headline to start a dialogue [sp]. In response, over half the folks posting in this thread, and I know for a fact that some of them are gays and lesbians, figured out what is going on in this specific crime in Lincoln, Nebraska. They determined for themselves, based on the news reports and background information from Google, whether this was a hate crime or false reporting.

dforkus: Oh come now, this is the internet, you are allowed to have an opinion, are you really saying, after all you posted that you really don't have the slightest inkling either way?

More or less, yeah. So far, I haven't seen enough evidence to conclusively say either option is true. I'm a natural cynic, so my Weeners to any news story is distrust. This particular story didn't seem to have an excessive number of reasons to distrust it, though, which leaves it at neutral. It's not that I don't have any sort of opinion -- I've had several over the time of this, actually, mostly contradicting each other -- but I don't have a firm opinion. The one I do have is liable to change at any moment when further information becomes available. One reason why I haven't expressed it here is that I'm not wedded (or welded) to it like some people seem to be with theirs. I wasn't there, I don't know what happened, and I'm not going to pretend I do. Not everyone makes up their mind to the point that they will not be confused with facts; I'm awaiting more facts.

Have I been arguing "it could have happened this way" scenarios? Sure. I do that with everything, especially IRL. I like doing it. I used to play a game where each person would pick three headlines and try to work them all into one story, tabloid-style. In this case, people were giving reasons why it couldn't have happened the way she said, so I naturally started thinking of reasons hwy it could. That doesn't mean I think it necessarily did happen that way, only that it could have.

There have been mentions of a lack of evidence left by the attackers. I haven't seen any news report to that effect yet; absence of news is not news of absence. That would be a telling point -- it's hardly likely that three such people could do something like this without leaving any trace of evidence at all (CSI notwithstanding), so if we do get a news story saying the police were unable to find any evidence of intrusion, that would be significant. But not having any police report at all, yes or no, is just another reason to not set my opinion in stone, or even moderately firm gelatin. We just don't know.

As for what I hope? I hope it's a hoax, because that means just one warped person instead of three or more. I don't know any of the people involved, so I'm just going by the numbers: better one than three. That doesn't make for a very good debate on Fark, though.

Sorry I couldn't be more dogmatic or something, but I really don't have a firm opinion on what actually happened, and absent more information, I'm not likely to.

Delay: EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.

I don't understand this post EmmaLou. Upthread you claimed to be the actual living breathing person behind the Fark account that submitted this headline and linked it to the purported news article. Give me the benefit of the doubt for a moment here, I believe over 99% of all Farkers know how that Fark submission and anonymous association works.

And now you want us to believe that some other "subby has been posting" separate from the Fark nickname who posted "around midnight" and is representing someone else.

Then you say that yourself, as the submitter, submitted the news article and headline to start a dialogue [sp]. In response, over half the folks posting in this thread, and I know for a fact that some of them are gays and lesbians, figured out what is going on in this specific crime in Lincoln, Nebraska. They determined for themselves, based on the news reports and background information from Google, whether this was a hate crime or false reporting.

She just got caught in a slip up and that is an attempt to distance herself from it.

For starters "Farkette's ex-coworker and very loose acquaintance to the point where she is asking the "victims" real friends to give the "victim" her regards on facebook because she doesn't even have a cordial speaking relationship with her was attacked in her home. She was tied up, had anti-gay slurs cut into her skin, and had her home set on fire" wasn't likely to get a green light and an abundance of sympathy and attention from strangers so she interjected herself into the situation and is now trying to walk it back after playing up her connection to the "victim" and how-dare-you-ing a bunch of posters for most of the thread.

/the headline is a hoax

SundaesChild: Worldwalker: EmmaLou: Worldwalker: EmmaLou: With the TF that I don't have?

Worldwalker: A month of TF costs less than a deli sandwich.

EmmaLou: And? Money isn't the issue. Criminey people, I just wanted to submit a link like people do every day.

You said you had to submit this particular link because you don't have TF. I pointed out that TF is not exorbitantly expensive. Now you're saying "money isn't the issue." So if money isn't an issue, and you needed TF, you'd have TF, invalidating your whole argument.

Y'know, you're doing as much to convince me this story is a hoax as BraveNewCheneyWorld is to convince me it isn't. Isn't it supposed to be the other way around?

You know she means that she didn't submit the link to solicit money, right? Because you are talking about something entirely different.

She was replying to me where I said TF was cheap, not to the comment about the donations. She said "With the TF I don't have?" and I pointed out how cheap TF was, and then, in reply to me she said money was not the issue. So if the price of TF isn't an issue, yet she doesn't have TF ("the TF I don't have"), what is?

So something is seriously not adding up there. EmmaLou is making a better case for the "hoax" crowd than any of them are. Subby/not-subby, rich/poor, good friend/former co-worker ... I'm still not sure what's going on with her.

If you've never read Raph Koster's essay "A Story About A Tree", read it. And then, once you've absorbed it, read Tracy Spaight's article "Who Killed Miss Norway?"

Ugh. Gay, straight, religious, atheist, I don't give a shiat. I'm just sick of humans being humans. My thoughts are with your friend, Subby.

EmmaLou: There's no hoax. I'm just a girl who has a friend (who I met while working with her) who had this happen to her...whether by her own hand or not. I don't know. I wasn't there. It's not news, it's Fark. Eat more chicken, etc, etc.

Yep. In all seriousness the highest priority should be getting your friend health care, it really doesn't matter to me the nature of the crime. For now, that's not the point. Since she is your friend, please tell us, is she receiving the health care she needs? Whether hoax or horrible hate crime she needs help. If she is not getting that care, what can be done about it?

MoeSzyslak: Delay: EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.

I don't understand this post EmmaLou. Upthread you claimed to be the actual living breathing person behind the Fark account that submitted this headline and linked it to the purported news article. Give me the benefit of the doubt for a moment here, I believe over 99% of all Farkers know how that Fark submission and anonymous association works.

And now you want us to believe that some other "subby has been posting" separate from the Fark nickname who posted "around midnight" and is representing someone else.

Then you say that yourself, as the submitter, submitted the news article and headline to start a dialogue [sp]. In response, over half the folks posting in this thread, and I know for a fact that some of them are gays and lesbians, figured out what is going on in this specific crime in Lincoln, Nebraska. They determined for themselves, based on the news reports and background information from Google, whether this was a hate crime or false reporting.

She just got caught in a slip up and that is an attempt to distance herself from it.

For starters "Farkette's ex-coworker and very loose acquaintance to the point where she is asking the "victims" real friends to give the "victim" her regards on facebook because she doesn't even have a cordial speaking relationship with her was attacked in her home. She was tied up, had anti-gay slurs cut into her skin, and had her ...

Most call it Attention Whoring.

muck4doo: Most call it Attention Whoring.

Precisely the point I was conveying.

I think this is gonna turn out to be a hoax.....a jilted ex lover or an insurance scam possibly. Use the "hate crime" approach to draw sympathy and distract. Perhaps not...we'll see.

Xcott: Again, Occam's razor: you hear about a crime on the Internet and the facts don't add up. Which is a simpler explanation, that the crime was a hoax, or that Internet people screwed up some of the facts?

Well, since I'm smarter than anyone else here and I say that this was a hoax, the simplest explanation is that I'm right and it's a hoax.

Rogan999: The "3 Masked Men" are guilty. The people who are arrested for it are innocent until proven guilty.

Seeing how the three masked men don't exist, I don't believe they can be guilty.

EmmaLou: I'm just a girl who has a friend (who I met while working with her) who had this happen to her...whether by her own hand or not.

And the backtracking keeps on going.

xl5150: Rogan999: The "3 Masked Men" are guilty. The people who are arrested for it are innocent until proven guilty.

Seeing how the three masked men don't exist, I don't believe they can be guilty.

You fail at Boolean logic. All nonexistent men are guilty, by vacuous implication.

Speaking of which, you could probably typeset this whole thread and sell it as a textbook on logical fallacies.

Xcott: You fail at Boolean logic. All nonexistent men are guilty, by vacuous implication.

Epiphany: EmmaLou: I'm just a girl who has a friend (who I met while working with her) who had this happen to her...whether by her own hand or not.

And the backtracking keeps on going.

Yeah I was under the impression that somebody had to be some kind of homophobic bigot to merely suggest that it migh be self inflicted. Now all of the sudden her bestfriend is implying that might just be the case. I has a confused.

MoeSzyslak: Epiphany: EmmaLou: I'm just a girl who has a friend (who I met while working with her) who had this happen to her...whether by her own hand or not.

And the backtracking keeps on going.

Yeah I was under the impression that somebody had to be some kind of homophobic bigot to merely suggest that it migh be self inflicted. Now all of the sudden her bestfriend is implying that might just be the case. I has a confused.

If it wasn't for that one person knowingly calling out EmmaLou for being just an ex acquaintance, I'd still be convinced EmmaLou was the original person who started the hoax. Unless she made an alt to reveal herself as only an acquaintance to get the heat off her after my accusation.

We're through the looking glass here, people.

This is an unending thread. There needs to be a followup. For real.

Also, the fark Gods must be merciful: I'm not banhammared.

EmmaLou, get psychological help.

I've figured out the name of the person who is claiming the attack, too. The Lincoln Journal Star leaked some information about the victim, before hastily removing it. A little google-searching and process of elimination and you find her. She has a prominent position in the Omaha community and the Prariepride Festival, has been involved at speaking at schools, but there's literally nothing else on her aside from the fact she too changed her name once. I don't see her name associated with the blog.

Whatever, not a great digital footprint.

Epiphany: EmmaLou: ginandbacon: Can we help in any way? Is there somewhere we can send donations to help her with hospital bills or to set up new housing?

http://starcitypride.org/victim-recovery-fund/

Subby here. posting from my phone so I can't format link. this is the site for helping. she has no insurance. this girl is such a sweetheart with the best heart. she just wants to live her life and rescue dogs. this should never happen to anyone!

So you said you were the subby and solicited donations.

EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.

And here you say both that you aren't subby, you are subby, and you don't solicit donations.
~
~
THIRD PERSON, people! She was referring to herself in the third person.

Do I have to be the only person here to get everything right?

she just wants to live her life and rescue dogs

HILARIOUS! So do I, come to think of it.

Also laffing at the moarans who still think it might be true. Occam's Razor - the go-to tool for idiots.

"Putting all the discussion aside.. if we use Occam's Razor.. let's see now.. it says I am correct. Yaaaaaaaaay! Yaaaaaaaaaaaay for me!"

Big Ramifications: Occam's Razor - the go-to tool for idiots.

Look pal, you don't realize this, but I'm an athiest. I have also seen every episode of "House M.D." ever. Occam's Razor is the only thing that means anything.

I'm donating 50 thousand dollars to the link EmmaLou begged me to donate to (she doesn't have insurance! donate here!) and you are a horrible bastard demon wizard for thinking I would do else wise. You christian republican piece of shiat.

Big Ramifications: Epiphany: EmmaLou: ginandbacon: Can we help in any way? Is there somewhere we can send donations to help her with hospital bills or to set up new housing?

http://starcitypride.org/victim-recovery-fund/

Subby here. posting from my phone so I can't format link. this is the site for helping. she has no insurance. this girl is such a sweetheart with the best heart. she just wants to live her life and rescue dogs. this should never happen to anyone!

So you said you were the subby and solicited donations.

EmmaLou: Subby has been posting, and I believe I posted around midnight last night when my character was called into question. I have a job, and I'm sorry that I can't monitor Fark all day.

I just submitted the story to start a dialoge, which happened, as that's what Fark is about. If it's a hoax, it's a hoax, and I feel sorry that she felt she had to do that for whatever reason. If it's not a hoax, then I feel sorry that people like this are out there.

Someone up farther asked about donations, so I posted the only link I know where they're accepting donations. I don't solicite donations.

And here you say both that you aren't subby, you are subby, and you don't solicit donations.
~
~
THIRD PERSON, people! She was referring to herself in the third person.

Do I have to be the only person here to get everything right?

she just wants to live her life and rescue dogs

HILARIOUS! So do I, come to think of it.

Also laffing at the moarans who still think it might be true. Occam's Razor - the go-to tool for idiots.

"Putting all the discussion aside.. if we use Occam's Razor.. let's see now.. it says I am correct. Yaaaaaaaaay! Yaaaaaaaaaaaay for me!"

yeah, I got the third person thing too. Also she wasn't soliciting for donations, she was asked about them first first. I don't know what to actually think anymore about the story as far as hoax/no hoax until more actual evidence comes out, but I don't think she's (subby) trying to con anybody.

Put me in the hoax category too. It was immediately what came to mind when I read the article. Is the friends name Tawana?

Oznog: I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's a lot of strange things- well, all of it- here, and no evidence that CAN'T be explained by "self-inflicted hoax".

Are you suggesting that there's something that cannot be explained by "three masked intruders"? Seems equally possible to me.

Worldwalker: So if the price of TF isn't an issue, yet she doesn't have TF ("the TF I don't have"), what is?

Oh, I don't know, how about "TF is a total waste of time, inhabited by self-important wankers, such as yourself"?

Would that satisfy you, your Lordship? Wait... You don't have TF. What is the issue preventing this? Speak into the microphone, for the transcript, of course. It's all very normal, but we're just asking questions, you understand.

Although, I gotta say that the retention of counsel pushes me slightly into the "hoax" camp.

One retains an attorney when one has a position to defend, or an intended defendant to sue.

Now it could be that counsel was retained in the hope of suing the alleged perps, if found, or if already known. It could.

But it doesn't feel that way.

I readily confess that this is "gut" rather than "brain", though.

Deucednuisance: Worldwalker: So if the price of TF isn't an issue, yet she doesn't have TF ("the TF I don't have"), what is?

Oh, I don't know, how about "TF is a total waste of time, inhabited by self-important wankers, such as yourself"?

Speak for yourself. That's not how I see TF or TF'ers. And even if I did, if there was something I needed to do that having TF would enable me to do, I would do it and just not read what's there.

Would that satisfy you, your Lordship? Wait... You don't have TF. What is the issue preventing this? Speak into the microphone, for the transcript, of course. It's all very normal, but we're just asking questions, you understand.

What's preventing me? Simple: I have no particular need for it. Occasionally someone sponsors me, and I drop in once in a while, but mostly I have other things I want to do with that time, so I don't buy it for myself (though I do sponsor other people as a sort of "like" on really good posts). But there's nothing I want to do right now that having TF would allow me to do more easily.

This is not the case with the OP, who said she submitted that link, and in the way she did, because she wanted to start a discussion and had to do it that way because she didn't have TF. If it was important to me to start a discussion about something in particular, and having TF would make that easier to do, I'd get TF. If there was anything I wanted to do that could be done only with TF, or even more easily with TF, I'd get TF. Both the cost and the effort involved are trivial. So when someone says they're doing something in a roundabout and somewhat ineffective way because of a lack of TF, that sends up a red flag for me. Either they're so poor they make me (and your average church mouse) look rich, which the OP says is not the case, or the whole thing about "the TF I don't have" was hastily contrived, along with the "well, I just wanted to start a discussion" part, in response to what people were saying.

Something I find particularly intriguing: You're lashing out at me for not taking the OP at her word and believing the incident happened exactly as reported and the OP's involvement is pure as the driven snow. NewCheneyWorld and one or two others have been doing exactly the same because I pointed out ways in which it could be entirely true, and they're insisting that I'd long ago made up my mind in that regard. You can't both be right!

And I'll say the same thing to you I did to them: I don't have enough information to make a decision one way or the other. I'm not there. I don't know any of these people. I have no idea what's in the police reports, what the crime scene investigators found, how trustworthy any of the parties concerned are, or anything else beyond a few news reports and a lot of Internet speculation. Until I do have that information, I'm not going to agree with either point of view, because it's not a point of view I share. I don't know.

Has it come to this, that instead of evaluating a situation and withholding judgement until we know more, we're now expected to make a snap judgement and then cling to it like a drowning man with a life ring, no matter what else happens? Decisiveness has its place, but so does considered deliberation, and this seems to me to be a place for the latter.

Deucednuisance: One retains an attorney when one has a position to defend, or an intended defendant to sue.

I guess it depends whether the victim said "oh crap I better get a lawyer," or if a lawyer came by and said "let me give you pro-bono assistance to bolster my cred as a defender of LGBT issues."

I agree that it never seems to help you in the court of public opinion if you talk through a lawyer or even admit to having retained a lawyer. The victim of a barbaric violent crime probably doesn't think about that, though.

Worldwalker: What's preventing me? Simple: I have no particular need for it.

So, why is that not sufficient reason for EmmaLou? She posted a link, something lots of people do, and it got greened, something that the Mods have not seen fit to bestow upon any of my submitted links. And I, too, am a filthy liter. What of it?

Worldwalker: You're lashing out at me

Oh, puh-lease. "Lashing out"? Is your skin so thin that the obvious jape was lost on you?

Worldwalker: Has it come to this, that instead of evaluating a situation and withholding judgement until we know more, we're now expected to make a snap judgement and then cling to it like a drowning man with a life ring, no matter what else happens?

Haven't read any of my posts in this thread, have you?

Deucednuisance: Worldwalker: What's preventing me? Simple: I have no particular need for it.

So, why is that not sufficient reason for EmmaLou? She posted a link, something lots of people do, and it got greened, something that the Mods have not seen fit to bestow upon any of my submitted links. And I, too, am a filthy liter. What of it?

Because she said she had a need for TF but didn't have it. That's what struck me as weird.

As for my reaction to you, humor doesn't come through well in text, I don't always pay attention to the names on posts, and with at least one person flat-out calling me a liar, I may indeed be a bit touchy here. So if I bit an unnecessary piece off you, sorry; would some duct tape help stick it back on? :)

That lady attacked herself because she's gay. What a homophobe.

Stoj: Follow up!

Well she says it's not a hoax so I guess that means it's not a hoax. Glad she cleared that up.

/it's a hoax

Stoj: Follow up!

Cue the skeptics hailing her as an attention whore.

I hope they throw the book at her when she finally confesses that it's a hoax. Also, I wonder how dumb all those people that were at the vigil shown in the article will feel once she finally comes clean.