Those who matter, or why I am running for Supervisor

[Post removed. You can state your reasons why you support the candidate, but don't just post a link to another website. ]

Huh? I don't live in San Mateo County and am not eligible to vote there. I am not the person who runs the Ayres blog. I am merely letting your readers know that Stogner got an endorsement on another blog by someone who DOES live in San Mateo Countyqcm2.

How is it that Stogner can talk here about why people should vote for him but I can't post a link to someone else's website that talks about Stogner?

Websleuths posted the link to the William Ayres blog, which has endorsed Stogner. Web Link

For the record: The Dr. William Ayres is not a political blog. It was started in 2008 by a victim of Dr. Ayres. Since then it has posted hundreds of stories on the Ayres case and other cases involving pedophile doctors from around the country. It has been used as a source for information on the case by numerous news organizations; police departments and law firms from around the country . In 2010, the Boston Globe cited the Ayres blog as a reputable source for information on the Ayres case.

The Ayres victim has endorsed Stogner because Stogner has spoken in forums during this campaign that his first act of supervisor will be to rescind the Lifetime Achievement Award given to Ayres in 2002 from the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors. This was given to Ayres before he was arrested.

Also, for the record: the Ayres victim who runs the Ayres blog joined Rich Gordon's Facebook page and asked if he would rescind Ayres' Lifetime Achievement Award.

Gordon's response to the request? Gordon "unfriended" the Ayres victim and blocked him from posting on his Facebook page.

I still don't understand your reasoning for deleting the Ayres blog link at all. The victim doesn't either. You are doing a disservice to your readers here by deleting the direct endorsement link.

I do live in San Mateo County and can vote here. I have not made up my mind whom to vote for for this seat yet. I am not familiar with the Dr. Ayers case or circumstances (and it doesn't sound like I want to be nor would that alone win my vote one way or the other). But I do echo Lurker's question about why Mr. Stogner can post as to why he should recieve my vote, while others can't post a reference to a web link pro or con. I was also a bit surprised that Mr. Stogner's post was allowed since it made some direct accusations against others, without proof (terms of use). I won't make up my mind soley by anything I read on this forum, but I am interested in making sure I fully understand the terms of use. As a poster who feels the need to remain anonymous I am very sensitive to not violating those terms so as to retain the privledge to post anonymously. I would apprciate any comment/clarification the Almanac might see fit to provide.

[Editor's note: The concern is when someone simply posts a link to another site without expressing an opinion or providing information or context about the site.]

Beautiful letter and from the heart. You have my vote.

Ok, as I have now provided context about the link to the William Ayres blog's endorsement of Stogner (they endorsed him because of his advocacy for the victims in this case), I hope that you will permit me to repost their endorsement. I did not write the endorsement but have a keen interest in the case:

Web Link

I was amazed by the speed with which "Lurkers" post was removed by the editor and the reasons the editor gave for it's removal. The fact that Lurker did not state any position on Mr. Stogner and merely posted a web link to an endorsement should not be a reason to remove the post any more than Pam Grange posts a weekly bestseller list for Kepler's Books and does not advise readers what books to buy and what books to avoid.

Having said that, I find some bias by the editor with the amount of time it takes for the removal of postings due to a violation of the terms of use. I have been trying for two days both by e-mail and a phone call to have additional posts removed by individuals that have pirated my pseudonym on another thread and made false statements but still to no avail.

Like "WhoRUpeople", I am also interested in fully understanding the terms of use and not violating those terms but I would disagree that there is any privilege to posting anonymously or even registering and using one's full name since it does not appear to me to always be a level playing field.

What makes you think you are the only Thomas who lives in Sharon Heights?

Stogner for Supervisor!

I hope each and every Thomas in Menlo Park votes early and often for the man.

The "level playing field" Thomas wants is:

1. He can post anonymously (or pseudonymously).
2. He can routinely attack people using ad-hominem methods who post using their real names.
3. He is victimized if someone else uses his pseudonym apparently because it reflects negatively on his "reputation"?

What "reputation"? He's not putting his reputation on the line since he posts pseudonymously. The Almanac should just ignore this creep and his (allegedly) whining e-mails and phone calls. He's routinely attacked others and he's just getting what he deserves. It's a well-needed wake up call for him.

Stogner is a man of the people. With all the other candidates in this race (and elsewhere, in California, and nationally) are paying lip service to pension reform and rolling back unions, Stogner is "calling a spade a spade" indeed. How does Papan take money from unions and then take them on to stop this raiding of the treasury??

Wagstaffe's message to Munks is the San Mateo County modern times version of let them eat cake during the French revolution. Those who mater? Did any reporter ever ask him what he meant by that? Did any reporter ever ask him how he could defend top law enforcement officials visiting brothels and underage brothels at that?

There's plenty of status quo people already on that board. Stogner needs to shake it up. Be honest to yourself and vote for a real, honest human being instead of a B.S. artist. There's something really wrong in this country in encouraging the obvious B.S. artists and trying to discredit people like Stogner. You can figure it out. It's not rocket science.

Michael Stogner is a man of courage, wisdom and honor. He has sacrificed many hours working on behalf of the disenfranchised who have been victimized.

I wish him the best in his bid for County Supervisor.

Editor - thank you for responding to my request for clarification. I do recall a recent post wherein a web link actually took people unknowingly to a pornographic cartoon. (not something one would want in their cyber footprint) I now understand your concern and applaud the care your action represented.

WhoRUPeople:

The person who runs the Ayres blog says that the Almanac News first visited his website right after I posted the link yesterday. The person from the Almanac News then proceeded to spend some time viewing the blog . Then they STILL decided to delete my comment and link to the blog. Makes no sense whatsoever. The blog clearly states it's about the Dr. William Ayres case in San Mateo and other cases that involve criminal doctors.

The person from the Ayres blog wondered if the Almanac News was in Gina Papan's pocket or something.

This is a copy of my e-mail sent to my Supervisor Rich Gordon re: The Sheriff and Under-Sheriff. Note it was sent the same day that Wagstaffe and Fox sent their e-mails to Munks and Bolanos.


Formal request to remove both Greg Munks and Carlos Bolanos
Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:02 PM

From:
"Michael Stogner" <michaelgstogner@yahoo.com>


To:
rgordon@co.sanmateo.ca.us

Dear Rich,

This is a very serious challenge for all of San Mateo
County.
You are the only Supervisor who I believe to be
serious about your position, and I trust you and
support you.

I need you to take public action to remove both of
these men now.

I know Greg is elected but Carlos is not. He is your
employee.

Sincerely,

Michael G. Stogner