[ ARC forum 2 ]

Probability this post is genuine?

Written by Paul B. at 23 Jan 2003 21:57:08:

As an answer to: Mama deciding written by erika at 23 Jan 2003 02:09:05:

Not in the remotest! Why?

This post was made on at the very least, two circumcision fora, almost simultaneously, and using the same text. Now, we who are frequent contributors to both of these certainly know both fora well, which is why we are alert to the simultaneous posting. However, there are no advertised links on either forum leading to the other, so it would take hours of solid study of one forum to find the connection to the other.

It is possible that some third site links to both fora. Perhaps someone will point to one that does, by way of interest. Such a site however, would be at least as obscure as either, and would itself take some researching to find. Whilst possible, such a degree of research is totally inconsistent with the lack of actual research implicit in the posting itself.

We are faced with a posting which claims to be a "spur of the moment" plea for support - claiming reluctance to proceed to mutilate her son, but which carefully enumerates only the common facile excuses for doing so, with no discussion of the obvious injurious consequences, as any person who had genuinely researched the topic would be eager to discuss. It is indeed well researched and carefully written, but with the intent to provoke outrage rather than express any sympathy for the victim. As some have said, it could not be written by a mother.

And Jim suggests it has been simultaneously posted on Circlist - which gives the whole game away.

I feel the temptation - the posting begs for point-by point debunking, but to do so would only be to gratify the poster. Anyone with intelligence will realise the absurdities immediately - once alerted to the subterfuge.


Answers: