Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Colorado Sun)   So you're a school administrator investigating sexting between students? Congrats, you're now facing jail time for possessing child pornography and your career is shot   (coloradosun.com) divider line
    More: Strange, Police, Constable, 32-year-old Bradley Bass, school administrators, Brush police officer Jared Barham, Child pornography, students' phones, 5,300-person community of Brush  
•       •       •

3855 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Nov 2022 at 6:30 AM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



127 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-11-23 12:22:37 AM  
After police learned the administrators had taken photos of the boys' phones, they arrested them.  "We ask the community to join us in moving forward on the pathway to forgive these atrocities..."

Well if you're going to forgive them, shouldn't you drop the charges?
 
2022-11-23 5:40:08 AM  
Bass violated a Colorado law that says even unintentionally possessing explicit images of kids is akin to having child pornography.

Hey kids, skip the middle man, sext teachers and administrators. Your problems go away to prison.
 
2022-11-23 6:17:29 AM  

edmo: Bass violated a Colorado law that says even unintentionally possessing explicit images of kids is akin to having child pornography.

Hey kids, skip the middle man, sext teachers and administrators. Your problems go away to prison.


send it to the cops and politicians... teachers are not the problem here.
 
2022-11-23 6:35:19 AM  

Tr0mBoNe: edmo: Bass violated a Colorado law that says even unintentionally possessing explicit images of kids is akin to having child pornography.

Hey kids, skip the middle man, sext teachers and administrators. Your problems go away to prison.

send it to the cops and politicians... teachers are not the problem here.


fark yeah!
 
2022-11-23 6:37:25 AM  
So... depictions of partial nudity are equivalent to a sex crime? Fark, this country has no sense of nuance or degree. Black and white. Hot and cold. That's it.

Carlin was right: Americans are stupid.
 
2022-11-23 6:40:15 AM  
I get the feeling that there are volumes of backstory between the police, the DA, and the administrator.
 
2022-11-23 6:40:27 AM  
"...Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones. They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server that few people had access to."

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-23 6:44:40 AM  
The case began when Bass and Brush School District's director of secondary schools, Scott Hodgson, investigated a tip about students sharing explicit images in April. They found photos on a few students' phones, saved in the disappearing photo application Snapchat. Worried the boys could delete the photos by logging into their Snapchat accounts remotely, Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones. They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server that few people had access to.

So, let me get this straight...

You're a school administrator. Even cops don't get to search a smartphone without informed consent or a warrant, and yet you "found photos on a few students' phones" - phones to which the kids couldn't have given you legal access, as they were likely minors and said access would've required the permission of the parents? New Jersey v. T.L.O - students have 4th Amendment protection.
Klump v Nazareth Area School District - educators can seize the phones, but they can't search them.

"Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one. IANAL, but the school administrators not only likely overstepped their authority, but did so in a particularly ham-handed way which opened themselves up to personal liability and culpability.
 
2022-11-23 6:45:54 AM  
He took photos of a picture of an exposed underage kid. At some point in the pursuit of evidence to punish the offenders, mistakes were made.
 
2022-11-23 6:46:31 AM  

FormlessOne: The case began when Bass and Brush School District's director of secondary schools, Scott Hodgson, investigated a tip about students sharing explicit images in April. They found photos on a few students' phones, saved in the disappearing photo application Snapchat. Worried the boys could delete the photos by logging into their Snapchat accounts remotely, Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones. They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server that few people had access to.

So, let me get this straight...

You're a school administrator. Even cops don't get to search a smartphone without informed consent or a warrant, and yet you "found photos on a few students' phones" - phones to which the kids couldn't have given you legal access, as they were likely minors and said access would've required the permission of the parents? New Jersey v. T.L.O - students have 4th Amendment protection.
Klump v Nazareth Area School District - educators can seize the phones, but they can't search them.

"Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one. IANAL, but the school administrators not only likely overstepped their authority, but did so in a particularly ham-handed way which opened themselves up to personal liability and culpability.


Is 12 years in prison an appropriate punishment?
 
2022-11-23 6:48:40 AM  
Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.
 
2022-11-23 6:54:23 AM  

IndyJohn: Is 12 years in prison an appropriate punishment?


Irrelevant to the discussion - they're not debating sentencing, but procedure.
 
2022-11-23 7:01:10 AM  

FormlessOne: Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.


TFA says the administrator believed that the photos (the "evidence" of the sexting) could still be deleted by the kids even if they didn't have their phones. So, if that's the case, then seizing the phones (and all of your following steps) wouldn't have accomplished anything.
 
2022-11-23 7:01:31 AM  
But it wasn't until late-July and August that the boys and their parents - who had already been interviewed by police - were again called and asked to bring in the boys' phones to have the images erased and information "extracted" and analyzed.

It sounds like the police took copies of the images as evidence.

Arrest them for possession of child pornography.
 
2022-11-23 7:04:33 AM  
Maybe next time he'll respect student's rights and privacy instead of creating copies of child porn.
 
2022-11-23 7:05:24 AM  

FormlessOne: Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.


0. Realize that students sexting one another is none of your damned business and go about your day.

/drtfa
//yours is good if a student complained of harassment.
 
2022-11-23 7:06:58 AM  

wxboy: FormlessOne: Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.

TFA says the administrator believed that the photos (the "evidence" of the sexting) could still be deleted by the kids even if they didn't have their phones. So, if that's the case, then seizing the phones (and all of your following steps) wouldn't have accomplished anything.


Belief isn't reality, and that still doesn't justify a 4th Amendment violation. Article goes into great detail about how that didn't happen - August, I think, is mentioned.

It's not up to them to decide, and the steps above would've likely both ensured the preservation of the evidence (which, as TFA says, wasn't deleted) and its usefulness as evidence (which, thanks to the 4th Amendment violation, would likely be inadmissible.) Oh, and it would've prevented charges to the school administrators.
 
2022-11-23 7:12:32 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-23 7:15:52 AM  

FormlessOne: wxboy: FormlessOne: Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.

TFA says the administrator believed that the photos (the "evidence" of the sexting) could still be deleted by the kids even if they didn't have their phones. So, if that's the case, then seizing the phones (and all of your following steps) wouldn't have accomplished anything.

Belief isn't reality, and that still doesn't justify a 4th Amendment violation. Article goes into great detail about how that didn't happen - August, I think, is mentioned.

It's not up to them to decide, and the steps above would've likely both ensured the preservation of the evidence (which, as TFA says, wasn't deleted) and its usefulness as evidence (which, thanks to the 4th Amendment violation, would likely be inadmissible.) Oh, and it would've prevented charges to the school administrators.


And yet if a police officer had seized those phones and stored copies of those photos without all of the permissions and paperwork, he'd get a slap on the wrist for violating those kids' 4th amendment rights, not charged with a sex crime. I'm OK with this administrator getting 12 years and a permanent offender record if any police officer who violates suspect rights also gets a decade in the can for the violation.
 
2022-11-23 7:18:38 AM  

FormlessOne: "Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one.


Not a threadjack:  Anyone who hasn't watched the miniseries Inside Man, I highly recommend it.

It features a well-intentioned man making a similar disastrous choice.

/the Stanley Tucci one
//not the older heist flick
 
2022-11-23 7:20:31 AM  

Toxophil: 0. Realize that students sexting one another is none of your damned business and go about your day.


I agree, but was the principal in one of those "mandatory reporting, you get fired and charged as an accessory if you DON'T investigate" situations?

/zero tolerance too often means zero intelligence
 
2022-11-23 7:24:34 AM  

FormlessOne: IndyJohn: Is 12 years in prison an appropriate punishment?

Irrelevant to the discussion - they're not debating sentencing, but procedure.


The fark it's irrelevant

Seriously?
 
2022-11-23 7:26:02 AM  

FormlessOne: Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.


FTFY. There's no need to bend over backwards to keep the the school to prison pneumatic pipeline humming.
 
2022-11-23 7:32:02 AM  
I've never really understood that line of thinking. OMG teens seeing other teens naked may scar them forever! SOMEBODY HAS TO DO SOMETHING!

I mean yeah if the pics weren't consensual or get posted online then there is a problem, otherwise why get involved?
 
2022-11-23 7:35:42 AM  
"They found photos on a few students' phones, saved in the disappearing photo application Snapchat. Worried the boys could delete the photos by logging into their Snapchat accounts remotely, Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones."

Well, they're either pervs or monumentally stupid; in either case they shouldn't be school administrators.
 
2022-11-23 7:40:28 AM  

wxboy: TFA says the administrator believed that the photos (the "evidence" of the sexting) could still be deleted by the kids even if they didn't have their phones. So, if that's the case, then seizing the phones (and all of your following steps) wouldn't have accomplished anything.


Take the phone and turn it off.  Any updates made to the accounts remotely wouldn't sync until the phone was turned back on in an area with coverage.  Investigators have cage boxes they can boot seized phones in to pull records from without the possibility of remote changes taking effect.

For actual crimes, at least.  The high schoolers sending pictures back and forth are probably f*cking in the gym after hours anyway.
 
2022-11-23 7:46:54 AM  

LoneVVolf: wxboy: TFA says the administrator believed that the photos (the "evidence" of the sexting) could still be deleted by the kids even if they didn't have their phones. So, if that's the case, then seizing the phones (and all of your following steps) wouldn't have accomplished anything.

Take the phone and turn it off.  Any updates made to the accounts remotely wouldn't sync until the phone was turned back on in an area with coverage.  Investigators have cage boxes they can boot seized phones in to pull records from without the possibility of remote changes taking effect.

For actual crimes, at least.  The high schoolers sending pictures back and forth are probably f*cking in the gym after hours anyway.


That depends on if the photos actually reside in the phone, or are being accessed in the cloud through the app. That is, if you're turning the phone on in a Faraday cage, would you still be able to see any of the photos? I suppose they might still be in a local data cache and thus recoverable, but now I'm getting well beyond my knowledge.
 
2022-11-23 7:51:33 AM  
The school resource office (aka the cop on campus) failed to do his job, and once again... the police department is protecting one of its own.

The Thin Blue Line has a yellow streak down its back.
 
TWX
2022-11-23 7:53:28 AM  

metric: So... depictions of partial nudity are equivalent to a sex crime? Fark, this country has no sense of nuance or degree. Black and white. Hot and cold. That's it.

Carlin was right: Americans are stupid.


So how does that apply in films like Romeo and Juliet when an underage teenage actress is nude?  Olivia Hussey portrayed in Juliet nude bed with Romeo, clearly in a sexual context, and this movie was shown to us in high school Freshman English class.  IIRC parental permission slips were sent home beforehand.

Also if the school official was doing this in the context of his government job, why doesn't he enjoy qualified immunity?  Is he within his authority to pursue disciplinary investigations on campus?
 
2022-11-23 7:54:40 AM  
I think the solution here may be to get rid of the prosecutor. S/he must know that the law was not intended to punish those who were attempting to investigate or end the distribution of child porn. While the administrator, as noted above, should not have been searching phones without a warrant and his subsequent actions were unsound, the charges that he faces are outrageous. The prosecutor is displaying wickedly poor judgment.
 
2022-11-23 7:58:50 AM  

FormlessOne: Seriously, the likely right course of action would've been to:

1. Seize the phones.
2. Call their parents and the police.
3. Explain that you suspect that a crime may have occurred, that the phones contain the evidence, and that the evidence may involve pictures of other underage students.
4. Turn the phones over to the police, with the permission of the parents.

That's it. You're not Inspector Gadget, and your authority ends where the law begins.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-11-23 7:59:39 AM  

Floki: The school resource office (aka the cop on campus) failed to do his job, and once again... the police department is protecting one of its own.

The Thin Blue Line has a yellow streak down its back.


Nothing in the article suggests they consulted the SRO or anyone in law enforcement. I'm sure there will pretty of threads today and many days after to call out bad police work but this doesn't appear to be one.
 
2022-11-23 8:00:09 AM  

Ragin' Asian: [Fark user image image 425x238]


Username checks out
 
2022-11-23 8:00:55 AM  

FormlessOne: The case began when Bass and Brush School District's director of secondary schools, Scott Hodgson, investigated a tip about students sharing explicit images in April. They found photos on a few students' phones, saved in the disappearing photo application Snapchat. Worried the boys could delete the photos by logging into their Snapchat accounts remotely, Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones. They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server that few people had access to.

So, let me get this straight...

You're a school administrator. Even cops don't get to search a smartphone without informed consent or a warrant, and yet you "found photos on a few students' phones" - phones to which the kids couldn't have given you legal access, as they were likely minors and said access would've required the permission of the parents? New Jersey v. T.L.O - students have 4th Amendment protection.
Klump v Nazareth Area School District - educators can seize the phones, but they can't search them.

"Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one. IANAL, but the school administrators not only likely overstepped their authority, but did so in a particularly ham-handed way which opened themselves up to personal liability and culpability.


"What? I can't just trash the servers, blame the tech support, and have the city pay thousands to settle?"
 
TWX
2022-11-23 8:03:10 AM  

Bruscar: I think the solution here may be to get rid of the prosecutor. S/he must know that the law was not intended to punish those who were attempting to investigate or end the distribution of child porn. While the administrator, as noted above, should not have been searching phones without a warrant and his subsequent actions were unsound, the charges that he faces are outrageous. The prosecutor is displaying wickedly poor judgment.


Schools legally act in loco parentis for students on campus, unescorted by parents to and from parents, and on school field trips.  Schools have fairly broad authority over student behavior, through just about whatever students bring with them to school.  Harassment of other students is typically within their authority to investigate and punish.
 
2022-11-23 8:07:51 AM  
I've been "Studying" porn on the internet for decades.  My dissertation should be out any time now.
 
2022-11-23 8:11:02 AM  
pbfcomics.comView Full Size
 
2022-11-23 8:11:04 AM  
Yeah, they should've informed the authorities about this one, and let them do the investigating.
 
2022-11-23 8:11:39 AM  

metric: So... depictions of partial nudity are equivalent to a sex crime? Fark, this country has no sense of nuance or degree. Black and white. Hot and cold. That's it.

Carlin was right: Americans are stupid.


...

...

...I remember on this site full-throated cries to bomb a stadium full of fans of a football team because they supported a coach who covered up for a pedophile.

Not the pedophile.

The disgraced coach.

This was long after he'd been removed from the team and died disgraced.

If you wanted nuance, you came to the wrong place. Welcome to Fark.
 
2022-11-23 8:14:31 AM  

Tr0mBoNe: send it to the cops and politicians... teachers are not the problem here.


hey, you left out, Youth Pastors!
 
2022-11-23 8:15:45 AM  

PunGent: FormlessOne: "Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one.

Not a threadjack:  Anyone who hasn't watched the miniseries Inside Man, I highly recommend it.

It features a well-intentioned man making a similar disastrous choice.

/the Stanley Tucci one
//not the older heist flick


Although the heist flick is good too.
 
2022-11-23 8:17:46 AM  

TWX: So how does that apply in films like Romeo and Juliet when an underage teenage actress is nude?


Thin ice here. I think it might fall under the guise as "art". It's a fine line. Not sure how it works for film and yet there are porn videos, considered porn. Remember the laws were written in a vague way when it comes to explaining porn.

Paintings, sculptures and the like where there are nudes, is considered art and it skates around the "porn" genre.
 
2022-11-23 8:18:38 AM  

Gleeman: I've never really understood that line of thinking. OMG teens seeing other teens naked may scar them forever! SOMEBODY HAS TO DO SOMETHING!

I mean yeah if the pics weren't consensual or get posted online then there is a problem, otherwise why get involved?


According to some sexually repressed people, any nude picture of an underaged person is inherently child porn, regardless of the circumstances.
 
2022-11-23 8:19:31 AM  
They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server

The folder titled "Spank Bank."
 
2022-11-23 8:21:26 AM  

grokca: The folder titled "Spank Bank."


But it's hidden in a directory called "2023 School Budget"
 
2022-11-23 8:21:41 AM  

OtherLittleGuy: FormlessOne: The case began when Bass and Brush School District's director of secondary schools, Scott Hodgson, investigated a tip about students sharing explicit images in April. They found photos on a few students' phones, saved in the disappearing photo application Snapchat. Worried the boys could delete the photos by logging into their Snapchat accounts remotely, Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones. They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server that few people had access to.

So, let me get this straight...

You're a school administrator. Even cops don't get to search a smartphone without informed consent or a warrant, and yet you "found photos on a few students' phones" - phones to which the kids couldn't have given you legal access, as they were likely minors and said access would've required the permission of the parents? New Jersey v. T.L.O - students have 4th Amendment protection.
Klump v Nazareth Area School District - educators can seize the phones, but they can't search them.

"Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one. IANAL, but the school administrators not only likely overstepped their authority, but did so in a particularly ham-handed way which opened themselves up to personal liability and culpability.

"What? I can't just trash the servers, blame the tech support, and have the city pay thousands to settle?"


Don't get me started on those a$$hats.

When we found the emails that pointed out that their leadership knew of the issue and ignored it, there was a collective "how can you be THAT farking stupid?!?!?"

Of course they got to keep their jobs.
 
2022-11-23 8:21:54 AM  
Based on some of the reactions here, I have to say that some of you are not familiar with the situation as it stands in schools. Every single person who works at one, from the head of school on down, can be liable for anything from both sides. If you did what this guy was trying to do (and I am betting he did not come up with this idea independently), you get this. If you don't do anything you get sued by the parents who were expecting you to raise their child (but not influence that child in any way or that is another lawsuit.) If the child fails, it is solely the teachers fault. Lawsuit. If the student does not get an 'A' in every subject (regardless of whether or not they actually deserved it), it is entirely the teachers fault. Lawsuit. If the child is not treated as royalty and allowed to break rules on a regular basis, it is the fault of the entire school. Lawsuit.

Having said this, I have to say that this was yet another example of faculty/administrators who overstepped their bounds, even with the fact that they can be charged for not reporting anything as well as if they do report it. I am still wondering why anyone would want to teach in this country and I thank my lucky stars I got out of that profession before most of the current level of insanity in 'education' started.

/it is not education anymore
//it is indoctrination and programming
///that is why they don't teach how to think anymore... certain aspects of our society don't like it when the plebes actually think for themselves...
 
2022-11-23 8:23:03 AM  
So, school administrator job opening?  Sounds like a real winner job.   I think I'll keep my strychnine tasting job down at the chemical complex.
 
2022-11-23 8:24:57 AM  

OtherLittleGuy: FormlessOne: The case began when Bass and Brush School District's director of secondary schools, Scott Hodgson, investigated a tip about students sharing explicit images in April. They found photos on a few students' phones, saved in the disappearing photo application Snapchat. Worried the boys could delete the photos by logging into their Snapchat accounts remotely, Bass used his work cellphone to take photos of the students' phones. They were then transferred to a folder on the school's server that few people had access to.

So, let me get this straight...

You're a school administrator. Even cops don't get to search a smartphone without informed consent or a warrant, and yet you "found photos on a few students' phones" - phones to which the kids couldn't have given you legal access, as they were likely minors and said access would've required the permission of the parents? New Jersey v. T.L.O - students have 4th Amendment protection.
Klump v Nazareth Area School District - educators can seize the phones, but they can't search them.

"Worried that the boys could delete the photos," you then used your work cellphone to take photos of the phones while the suspect pics were displayed? And then you transferred those photos to the school's server, where you couldn't guarantee custody?

I'm sorry, but, stupidity isn't somehow a defense on this one. IANAL, but the school administrators not only likely overstepped their authority, but did so in a particularly ham-handed way which opened themselves up to personal liability and culpability.

"What? I can't just trash the servers, blame the tech support, and have the city pay thousands to settle?"


"In one widely published photo, the school had photographed Robbins in his bed.[8] The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), U.S. Attorney's Office, and Montgomery County District Attorney all initiated criminal investigations of the matter, which they combined and then closed because they did not find evidence "that would establish beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone involved had criminal intent". "

Now that's seriously farked up. The school is spying on students in their homes, and the FBI says they can't find criminal intent, as if the spying itself isn't criminal.
 
2022-11-23 8:25:13 AM  

Harry Freakstorm: I think I'll keep my strychnine tasting job down at the chemical complex.


Hey there's an opening at the local Burger King, you might want to consider, oh wait, you know what?  Keep the tasting job at the chemical complex. Better benefits.
 
Displayed 50 of 127 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.