Opal has died?!?

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Hey buttplug -- if you'll recall, my father is a funeral director. He often writes the goddamned things.

That wasn't very nice. I don't think that buttplugs deserve that kind of abuse.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

The horse is also dead.

I'm sure this will help!

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I'm sure this will help!

They should have animated both his arms IMO.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

With Dan rather oddly appearing as a "survivor," but neither a "dear friend" nor anything else specifically.

The partner in her three-month fling, the man without whom Katherine would still probably be alive today, is front and center, but the (second) ex-husband that put up with her antics for years is only mentioned in passing?

So vindictive and hypocritical.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

The partner in her three-month fling, the man without whom Katherine would still probably be alive today, is front and center, but the (second) ex-husband that put up with her antics for years is only mentioned in passing?

So vindictive and hypocritical.

It's really strange to me, unless her family was always unsure of or didn't like Dan, because it was an awfully quick turnaround for him to be persona non grata, considering how long they were together.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Typical of the totally clueless respondents in this thread. Unlike Ken, who has a relative (conveniently dead, btw) who once owned a very small newspaper in East Buttfuck, and therefore could have invented her own definitions, or who could have tranmitted her memories to Ken incorrectly, and unlike Eleanor, whose cite is that she remembers (probably incorrectly) that her family did NOT pay to have a death notice published, or unlike Guin, who actually makes an argument from ignorance ("Some people call death notices 'obits' and "'obits" death notices and some people call both 'buthdjglovb," so that's my cite--that there ARE people who fuck up in this precise way!"), I actually have worked as a journalist at a big-city newspaper and have taught journalism at a major university, so please forgive me if I remain unimpressed by their boasting about their lousy memories or faulty assumptions.

The part of my post that you need to remember is that I was distinguishing between large, respectable newspapers and local shoppers, whose standards are whatever the untrained editors (like Ken's mom?) want them to be or the readers (like Eleanor?) think they are. Take my local paper, which is the largest, most respectable newspaper on the planet, by most people's standards: The New York Times. Look at their obituary pages and you will undoubtedly notice that they have one category called "Obituaries" which are written by Times' staffers, about the deaths of public figures, and are usually as objective as any news story gets. You cannot buy an obituary, no matter how rich or famous you may consider yourself to be: my co-author on my first book, a remarkably erudite scholar who published over a dozen books in his short lifetime and a full professor at a Manhattan university, did not merit a Times' obituary, despite the fact that he'd written, among many other things, several front-page book reviews for the Times. His family had to pay for a death notice, which appear separately from the obits, and write the text themselves. (The Times, of course, reserves the right to edit any death notice, as the amount of glurge and downright lies that family and friends might seek to slip in a death notice is pretty incredible. Generally, a respectable paper will allow a certain amount of harmless glurge --"He is now in a better place," say--but will draw the line at hyperbolic glurge --"He sits at the right hand of God now, and the Lord surely will call upon him for wise counsel" and the like, and they certainly will weed out untrue statements of fact, but other than that you can pay, by the word, to honor your dead relative.) If you look at the Times' obit page, it is crystal clear which are "Obits" and which are "Death Notices," even if you don't notice those clear headings.

Further down the food chain, such distinctions aren't so clear, and at the bottom of the food chain, which is where many Raffers seem to dwell, obits are the same as death notices, exactly as I stated. Let me pose one question for Ken, who seems to regard his mother's local rag as some kind of standard-setting example of journalism: if your mother has, say, JFK's asassination story and Aldous Huxley's obit and C.S. Lewis's obit (all three died on the same day, I believe) and she also has the death notice of some local bum who died drunk in some alley in East Bugfuck, does she call all of them "obits" and treat them equally: same font, same format, same charge for pubishing each one? If she does, she's bound to get confused at some point and publish the bum's "obit" above the President's. Typically, and more so than in most industries because of the incredible deadline pressure, newspapers have a highly specialized vocabulary for every term of art they use, simply because confusion under deadline pressure tends to result in embarrassing errors in print. So it makes sense that newspapers will distinguish between two superficially similar types of stories--obits and death notices--and most people think the two are more or less interchangible. My students, for example, usually began the term of "Journalism I" thinking as you do that they are interchangible, and I was able to show them the subtle and unsubtle differences between the two, which was btw a good way to teach the important distinction between news stories and advertising, which is the distinction between obits and death notices. So I've encountered this inability to distinguish many times before, and I'm no longer astonished to see it, or to notice how hard it is to eradicate, though very rarely do I have to work against the level of hostility that I do here. I mean, look at the bozo sock quoted at the top of the page: You're eager to believe Ken over me! This is Ken, the most hated person on this website until you ran into me. Or Guinny, making her typically inane observation based on the wisdom of the ignorant unwashed--and you credit her with making sense! Or Eleanor with two fingers up her nostrils, straining to remember some minor financial transaction of a decade or two ago, and accepting her memory as a cite. Sometimes I think you folks will refuse any information I offer, and jump all over each other just to see who can call me the most names the fastest.

Holy mackerel are you kidding me?

[Someone]

Did you seriously just quote that whole fucking thing, goddamn it?

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Did you seriously just quote that whole fucking thing, goddamn it?

Well my comment wouldn't have made any fucking sense at all if I hadn't, now, would it?

That is one giant wall of text over something so incredibly stupid. Mind boggling.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Kansas. Thank you...

You too? I grew up in Dodge City.

[Someone]

I used to live in nearby Hays, Katriona.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

The partner in her three-week fling, the man without whom Katherine would still probably be alive today, is front and center, but the (second) ex-husband that put up with her antics for years is only mentioned in passing?

So vindictive and hypocritical.

FTFY
From her LJ entries, it sounds like their final implosion was an ugly one, I doubt her mom much appreciated having to pack up and accompany her 40 year old daughter on a thousand miles trip to yet another 'new start'.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Obviously, Opal's not the only one without a life.

Huh?
Seems to me, she had too much life, all colliding and colluding.


I'd rather live w/o a life as compared to having to endure what Opal did. Try to imagine waking up every day, trapped inside Opal... :shudder:

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Huh?
Seems to me, she had too much life, all colliding and colluding.


I'd rather live w/o a life as compared to having to endure what Opal did. Try to imagine waking up every day, trapped inside Opal... :shudder:

Doesn't that whooshing sound keep you up all night? (Notice I mentioned Opal in the present tense, not the past tense.)

[Someone]

I haven't seen anyone call it, so I'll just make it official: I've got dibs on Opal's stereo.

[Someone]

I see Opal's mom has posted info on a fund for Dominic -- she included the bank account number and the bank routing number. Isn't that a bit risky? That's the info you're asked to give when setting up direct deposit. Is it safe as long as a scammer wouldn't have the SSN associated with the account?

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I haven't seen anyone call it, so I'll just make it official: I've got dibs on Opal's stereo.

And for the record, I do not want her rubber duck.

[Someone]

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

And for the record, I do not want her rubber duck.

Golf clap.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I see Opal's mom has posted info on a fund for Dominic -- she included the bank account number and the bank routing number. Isn't that a bit risky? That's the info you're asked to give when setting up direct deposit. Is it safe as long as a scammer wouldn't have the SSN associated with the account?

My understanding (and I could be wrong) is that if you have the bank account number, and catch a non-vigilant cashier, you could either deposit or withdraw funds, so it's not a good idea to publish that information.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I see Opal's mom has posted info on a fund for Dominic -- she included the bank account number and the bank routing number.

Isn't he a bit young for a boob job?

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I see Opal's mom has posted info on a fund for Dominic -- she included the bank account number and the bank routing number. Isn't that a bit risky? That's the info you're asked to give when setting up direct deposit. Is it safe as long as a scammer wouldn't have the SSN associated with the account?

You'd need the bank's physical address as well, that's it.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I see Opal's mom has posted info on a fund for Dominic -- she included the bank account number and the bank routing number.

So the scam has begun.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Golf clap.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

I see Opal's mom has posted info on a fund for Dominic -- she included the bank account number and the bank routing number. Isn't that a bit risky? That's the info you're asked to give when setting up direct deposit. Is it safe as long as a scammer wouldn't have the SSN associated with the account?

I think it's fine -- that same information is on every check you write. At most someone could deposit funds into your account without your consent.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

At most someone could deposit funds into your account without your consent.

The old Polish 419 scam.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

You'd need the bank's physical address as well, that's it.

Edited to Add: I've sent money from a Wells Fargo to another Wells Fargo with nothing more than account number, tracking number and physical address. What I forgot to mention was that the bank folks knew us on both ends.

Have at it.

[Someone]

There's also (at least at some banks, maybe all nowadays) different account numbers for checks and deposit slips. So if you give someone the deposit number, they could never withdraw funds anyway.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

So the scam has begun.

If Dominic's father is involved, it's no scam. If he posts about it on Fathom, I'd trust it. As far as I know he hasn't posted there since he and Opal split.

[Someone]

Wrong thread

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

The old Polish 419 scam.

OK, that was funny.

[Someone]

Since I'm the one who isn't afraid of using my phone is it appropriate for me to call her (Opal's mother) up and ask if the dope poster is her? (In a polite civilised and businesslike manner)

Furthermore is this something anyone wants me to do? I have no real interest in doing it but if I can help you all out by verifying the situation one way or the other I have no issue doing so.

[Someone]

No. No. No.

[Someone]

My fellow Dopers, I would have checked in earlier, but we here at Typical Doper Manor have been overcome with intense grief and heartbreak at the passing of our friend, our beacon of creative light, our beau ideal, our Number Three, yet Number One in our hearts and minds, our OpalCat.

Ms Typical Doper and yours truly have arranged several memorials in the coming weeks so we, the crestfallen Teeming Millions, may gather to remember and honor our beloved OpalCat. In the company of other Dopers, of other disciples of OpalCat, may we find peace. And bacon.

1) Saturday, March 23, 2:00 PM
First Unitarian Universalist Church, 4001 Ann Arbor-Saline Rd, Ann Arbor MI

2) Saturday, March 30, 7:00 PM
Graydon's Crossing, 1223 Plainfield Av NE, Grand Rapids MI

3) Hi Opal!

4) Sunday, April 21, 1:00 AM
Denny's (community room), 26415 Warns Rd, Perrysburg OH

5) Saturday, April 27, 2:00 PM
C2E2, McCormick Place (Yu-Gi-Oh! Suite), Chicago IL

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Since I'm the one who isn't afraid of using my phone is it appropriate for me to call her (Opal's mother) up and ask if the dope poster is her? (In a polite civilised and businesslike manner)

Furthermore is this something anyone wants me to do? I have no real interest in doing it but if I can help you all out by verifying the situation one way or the other I have no issue doing so.

Jesus Christ. DO NOT do that.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Since I'm the one who isn't afraid of using my phone is it appropriate for me to call her (Opal's mother) up and ask if the dope poster is her? (In a polite civilised and businesslike manner)

Furthermore is this something anyone wants me to do? I have no real interest in doing it but if I can help you all out by verifying the situation one way or the other I have no issue doing so.

You know, most of the time you seem not excessively mental, but you really need to get your head around the idea that calling strangers to ask them whether you've seen them on the internet is batshit crazy.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Since I'm the one who isn't afraid of using my phone is it appropriate for me to call her (Opal's mother) up and ask if the dope poster is her? (In a polite civilised and businesslike manner)

Furthermore is this something anyone wants me to do? I have no real interest in doing it but if I can help you all out by verifying the situation one way or the other I have no issue doing so.

Are you completely retarded or is this a specific bit of Internet Performance Art?

I really hope the later, because otherwise you're one stupid fuck.

Oh yeah and I suggest the Mods ban the stupid fuck either way if he does.

[Someone]

You all need to chill out, I learned from last time which I why I asked. No problem for me not to phone them. We'll agree to disagree about whether (respectable sensible) phone calls are a big deal or not in theory, while in practice I will respect that others consider them to be.

[Someone]

I'm not agreeing to jack shit.

[Someone]

What about generic manure?

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Jesus Christ. DO NOT do that.

Seriously, you fucking weirdo. What is wrong with you?

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

...I learned from last time which I why I asked...

Hey, that's progress. The take-home lesson from this time is scrap the phone call idea altogether.

[Someone]

My first reply got eaten up by my iPad incompetence, but basically it's either immaturity, a cultural difference, or one of those philosophical differences where I am in a tiny minority.

It is not my intent to cause problems for anyone and perfectly honestly I have learned not just from the initial dope banning but also the reaction here which I thought would be far more on my side otherwise I wouldn't have posted it (although I was also aware that I may have been wrong hence one reason I asked in advance)

So for the time being I will go by the rule of not calling people up from the Internet without at lest semi explicit permission. Truthfully I do not understand why precisely but I will sincerely go along with it - it is my intention to be a reasonable person and there are other purely IRL things I "understand" but are not intuitive to me and I had to be taught so this is not the end of the world.

I do appreciate the above posters' no holds barred approach by the way, as it was clearly good faith and helpful to me, even if looks over the top to others'.

[Someone]

I say let the idiot do it.

[Someone]

Hey - I never offered to do it!

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Since I'm the one who isn't afraid of using my phone is it appropriate for me to call her (Opal's mother) up and ask if the dope poster is her? (In a polite civilised and businesslike manner)

Furthermore is this something anyone wants me to do? I have no real interest in doing it but if I can help you all out by verifying the situation one way or the other I have no issue doing so.

Ok, lawyer + calling them up to ask them if they are really the ones posting online, (With "Also by the way is your daughter really <this internet handle> and is she dead?" thrown in.) = legal action before you can blink. Do you understand?

[Someone]

Completely disagree with that. I have no problem not calling because of it being wrong/distressing to phone people on the internet as is the consensus here, which I now adopt on the basis it is everyone's reasonable expectation... but there would be absolutly no legal cause against me if I called up to ask the question I wanted or if I said what you suggest. But that is a digression tbh because I will do no such thing for the given reasons. Indeed I would never refrain from this sort of thing for legal reasons. It is because it has been said in so many words in this thread that it would cause harm that I will not do this. I still do not understand why it will cause harm other than in the vague sense that this is just not done - but if you know something is going to cause harm you had damn well not do it without an excellent reason.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Ok, lawyer + calling them up to ask them if they are really the ones posting online, (With "Also by the way is your daughter really <this internet handle> and is she dead?" thrown in.) = legal action before you can blink. Do you understand?

I highly doubt that a lawyer in Arizona, no matter how skilled, will be able to successfully sue some kid in Britain over one weird phone call. That's a bit over the top.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

Since I'm the one who isn't afraid of using my phone is it appropriate for me to call her (Opal's mother) up and ask if the dope poster is her? (In a polite civilised and businesslike manner)

Furthermore is this something anyone wants me to do? I have no real interest in doing it but if I can help you all out by verifying the situation one way or the other I have no issue doing so.

Really, what is your obsession with calling strangers from the internet? Do you not step back for a moment and consider how weird that is? How weird it would be to get a call from someone who identified themselves as a poster on an internet message board, particularly if you're not the person they think you are.

Caller: Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering if this is coolbyrne?
Me: Sorry?
Caller: Is this coolbyrne from the Giraffe Board? I know this is going to sound weird, but I tracked down your number and just wanted to verify if this was the coolbyrne from the Giraffe Board.
Me: *click*

It would be extremely unsettling.

Now imagine if you called someone who WASN'T coolbyrne. It's just fucking weird, man. Don't ever, EVER do that. To anyone.

[Someone]

Originally Posted by Someone

... but basically it's either immaturity, a cultural difference, or one of those philosophical differences where I am in a tiny minority.

There's no philosphifical or cultural difference in question here you dimwit.

It's a "adults who know basic damned social skills" versus "bizarre poorly socialized basement dwelling Internet wierdos."

.... the reaction here which I thought would be far more on my side otherwise I wouldn't have posted it ....

Reallly this is astounding.

So for the time being I will go by the rule of not calling people up from the Internet without at lest semi explicit permission.

How about, "I will not be a dimwitted idiot and bizarre wierdo and won't call up people from the Internet, period."?

Truthfully I do not understand why precisely

Because, it is fucking idiotic and rude, people don't like fucking telemarketers calling them, why the fuck do you think some maladjusted freak calling them up over something some Internet snark-trolls write would seem acceptable.

Goddamn.

[Someone]

It's not an obsession, honestly.

But in that situation, my response would be something like "I beg your pardon" and then I would either understand what they were talking about and politely say no it wasn't me, or eventually give up out of frustration and hang up if I had no clue. I don't see it as being any different as if for a silly m add up example someone was calling me up thinking I was the chief marketing officer for Ribena. Either I would disabuse them of the notion or if they were nuts I would hang up eventually. Certainly it .is conceivable there could be a phone ddos by this method but I don't think this has been considered by anyone; furthermore there is a potential risk of out of hours phone calls, again something that is easy to avoid except on ancient landlines.

But I do not want to get into a huge argument defending my point of view. It isn't an important point of principle or anything! I'm happy to respect the status quo if that's what everyone wants, it doesn't matter who is "right".