![]() ![]() Section 5: OPA Board Subject: A Preview of the Future Msg# 1131721
|
||||||
So, was there anything that “Op Truth and Justice” wrote/said that was untrue or libelous? Or is everything he/she said correct, and the only real issue here is his/her anonymity?
I have not received anything from optruthandjustice about Diller. A couple of people forwarded me one or two items. What was in those were only links to Federal court documents on the internet. I’m of the mind that if you’re going to go after someone, hiding behind some pompous assumed name is about as cowardly as you can get, No disagreement here. Rather disgusting and Diller has every right to be upset about these anonymous communications to association members. I understand they were also sent to local papers. I believe they refused to publish. I would not allow any discussion of her private life on this forum. She eventually decided to present her own public statement here. The only issue relative to OPA as an entity is the charge that "some" board members are publicly attacking her, that the email smear campaign is originating from OPA computers, and that the email address could only have come from within OPA. I have no idea why Lakernick and/or Farr would be happy to see this latest Esther Diller Edition of the Ocean Pines Progress. It certainly appears the Progress is supportive of Diller, Lakernick, and Farr. Perhaps some see the Esther Diller Edition as helping their candidacy. Beats me. |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: So, was there anything that “Op Truth and Justice” wrote/said that was untrue or libelous? Or is everything he/she said correct, and the only real issue here is his/her anonymity? Seems Diller is rather fixated on finding out the identity of the—*achem,*— “suspect.” A pessimist might think this is because the content of the materials sent out by the “suspect” was pretty on point, not to mention incredibly damaging to her reputation, so loudly and publicly focusing on unmasking this person might serve as a distraction. I mean, at the end of the day, as long as nothing false was said, does it matter as anything but a curiosity? Don’t get me wrong, I’m of the mind that if you’re going to go after someone, hiding behind some pompous assumed name is about as cowardly as you can get, but that’s not really the issue, is it? “Aha! My weird, paranoid sleuthing has revealed that it was indeed [insert name] who said all of those true things about me! [insert name] has a political motive and a personal bias against me! Therefore, no one should pay attention to anything [insert name] says about me, regardless of how damning it is, or how objectively true it may be!” This is all very weird. |
Calendar |
![]() 6/28/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
![]() 7/26/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |
![]() 8/9/2025 - 9:00 A.M. |