Goldstein is reporting that Linda is dead

Goldstein is reporting that Linda is dead.
http://www.topix.com/forum/health/smoking/TC2...

It's true. Sad.

News Death Notice

H, Linda L. 67, Fairborn, March 24. Arrangements pending in care of Belton-Stroup Funeral Home

Published in Dayton Daily News on March 25, 2012

Only non-smokers posting here so far. Interesting.

Linda's roots were in Harlan County, Kentucky, the next county over from where my grandparents lived and are buried, and where my father lived as a young child. She and I connected here on topix not just because I, too, oppose the Ohio indoor smoking ban, but because I think I understood her, at least to a point.

No, I didn't always agree with her, especially with the tone of many of her posts here, and I always admonished her to quit. But she always sent me emails concerning the latest goings-on with the smoking ban in the Court after I left topix. I don't intend to tarry here for long, but when I saw news of her passing posted on Facebook I just had to return and pay my respects here.

I know many of you other non-smokers didn't like Linda, but I don't think you wanted to look past the fact of her smoking to see her as a person. And the way most of you treated her I don't think she would have wanted you to know her beyond what she posted here. Good grief, one of you even hoped she had died and posted so back on March 12th!! What is *wrong* with you people?! I suspect that many of you will fade into the woodwork, because from what I've seen -- back then as well as now -- few smokers really fuel your fire the way Linda did.

RIP, Linda

To me; well done, Linda. With thankfulness for your integrity and courage, I'm positive I'm not alone in simply saying thank you.

Farewell tireless warrior.
May God's peace be in you, and about you, for always now.

Love, and respect ~

Non-Cas Fan wrote:

I know many of you other non-smokers didn't like Linda, but I don't think you wanted to look past the fact of her smoking to see her as a person. And the way most of you treated her I don't think she would have wanted you to know her beyond what she posted here. Good grief, one of you even hoped she had died and posted so back on March 12th!! What is *wrong* with you people?! I suspect that many of you will fade into the woodwork, because from what I've seen -- back then as well as now -- few smokers really fuel your fire the way Linda did.
RIP, Linda

Frankly, I found her nasty, deceitful, and obnoxious very nearly 100% of the time I encountered her posts. That is the only window I had to her world, and it was not one that showed a person to whom I would have opened my door. It took little time for me to stop reading her posts almost entirely.
I did not wish her dead, though. I did wish Topix offered the option to select people whose content would not appear when I was on the forum. Given that option, I would have seen nothing of her beyond what others quoted for a very long time.
I believe I did agree with her once or twice, but only when she pointed out the abusiveness of other people's posts. Yes, some folks (besides Linda) went over the top and beyond anything resembling good taste, and that sometimes it was aimed at her made it no less offensive to me.
That said, I am sorry you have lost your friend. I will also say that, if I quit the forum, it will be more for loss of your input than for loss of hers--though we often disagreed as well.

I wonder where Sheri- the anti-chantix advocate is now. According to her, Chantix is so much worse for you than smoking. I guess dying of lung cancer is a cake-walk compared to having a few bad dreams on Chantix.

I DO NOT SMOKE wrote:

I wonder where Sheri- the anti-chantix advocate is now. According to her, Chantix is so much worse for you than smoking. I guess dying of lung cancer is a cake-walk compared to having a few bad dreams on Chantix.

Good question!

TruthBeTold wrote:

News Death Notice
H, Linda L. 67, Fairborn, March 24. Arrangements pending in care of Belton-Stroup Funeral Home
Published in Dayton Daily News on March 25, 2012

I'm curious about why you knew Linda's full identity. Did you seek her out and actually go to the trouble of tracing her IP address to find this information? Why would you do that? Did you mean her harm? Have you so little in your life that you would choose to spend any amount of time tracking down a poster on Topix? You wonder why smokers and anti-ban people despise the anti-smokers? This is why. You are so consumed with other people's lives that you invade their privacy. What could you possibly hope to gain from that?

RIP Linda wrote:

<quoted text>
She only 'fueled our fires' because she would never listen to us.
She claimed that smokers lived longer than non-smokers.
She claimed smoking was HEALTHY for you all the way up until her final few months.(Weird how she never told ANYONE she had lung cancer)
I feel deep remorse for the things I had said to her.(But don't think a second that she was the victim- as you said- she 'fueled the fires') I hope she rests in peace.
I also hope that her death will be the outcome of a better/more civilized discussion about the real issue- smoking.
I will miss her 'stupidity'(what I will now call- stubbornness).

You exposed yourself for what you really are back when you wished her dead. Why would ANYONE ever listen to any message you ever posted. You can't take back what you felt in your sociopath heart. Karma's a bitch.

I DO NOT SMOKE wrote:

I wonder where Sheri- the anti-chantix advocate is now. According to her, Chantix is so much worse for you than smoking. I guess dying of lung cancer is a cake-walk compared to having a few bad dreams on Chantix.

She's doing well, according to facebook. I think she's friends with "just candid" there, but that's just what I've heard from Linda.
I haven't seen posts there about Chantix, though. Just the usual stuff people post & re-post on Facebook, but thankfully not those incessant game updates and requests.

goldstein wrote:

<quoted text>
You exposed yourself for what you really are back when you wished her dead. Why would ANYONE ever listen to any message you ever posted. You can't take back what you felt in your sociopath heart. Karma's a bitch.

Ooooh interesting revelation goldstain..or is that sheri

Hmmm Internet anonymity is an interesting hiding place.

Dontcha just hate technical difficulties! lol

goldstein wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm curious about why you knew Linda's full identity. Did you seek her out and actually go to the trouble of tracing her IP address to find this information? Why would you do that? Did you mean her harm? Have you so little in your life that you would choose to spend any amount of time tracking down a poster on Topix? You wonder why smokers and anti-ban people despise the anti-smokers? This is why. You are so consumed with other people's lives that you invade their privacy. What could you possibly hope to gain from that?

HARM HER...WTF are you talking about you crazy old woman...Everyone knew her real info...it was posted several times on here...she kept on posting copies of those stupid emails that she would send to the state and in her excitement to show off, in doing so she posted her own name and email address...I called linda out for it many times over! Privacy is lost when one puts their own information on a public forum...which is stupid and dangerous by any standards...I told linda that several times...I said people who put real info down compromise the safety of not just them but everyone else!

If you notice, I did not put her full identity on here (the smoking side did)...but if you google the words linda fairborn obituary...guess what, its not rocket science!

Its good to see you haven't changed...a know it all who knows so little! lol

Why is it the people on your side typically are such morons?
No wonder you have to stand outside in the elements to smoke!

I also love how you have been hiding behind another persona all this time...talk about sneaky and deceitful!

RIP Linda wrote:

<quoted text>
Funny you mention karma at a time like this when linda spent 5 years claiming that she was healthy and that she wouldn't die from smoking. That she would out-live all us 'non-smokers'.:)
Died from lung cancer....hmmmm....How IRONIC!

She was health; then she wasn't five years later. That's the nature of life and death. Get back to us when you are nearing 70 or 80 and let us know how it's going for you.

goldstein wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm curious about why you knew Linda's full identity.

Is there anyone on Topix didn't know her real name? I believe that Linda posted her full name by accident, when she posted a email to her from Lance Himes. Unfortunately, she neglected to delete her name or email address. Oops. I guess, when you post as much as Linda did, mistakes are bound to happen. And on Topix there is no erasing (at least not by us.) Once it's out there, it's out there.

"From: Lance Himes
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:25 PM
To:'kybriar@ameritech.net'
Cc: DIRECTOR; Winston Ford; No Smoke; Odh Pressroom
Subject: Public Records Request - ODH response
Ms. Linda Hubbard,
I am writing on behalf of the Department of Health in response to your July 24, 2008 email in which you presented several questions related to the enforcement of Chapter 3794 of the Revised Code, Ohio’s smoke-free workplace act."

http://www.topix.com/forum/health/TK84DL6NTFQ...

Old Guy wrote:

<quoted text>
Is there anyone on Topix didn't know her real name? I believe that Linda posted her full name by accident, when she posted a email to her from Lance Himes. Unfortunately, she neglected to delete her name or email address. Oops. I guess, when you post as much as Linda did, mistakes are bound to happen. And on Topix there is no erasing (at least not by us.) Once it's out there, it's out there.
"From: Lance Himes
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:25 PM
To:'kybriar@ameritech.net'
Cc: DIRECTOR; Winston Ford; No Smoke; Odh Pressroom
Subject: Public Records Request - ODH response
Ms. Linda Hubbard,
I am writing on behalf of the Department of Health in response to your July 24, 2008 email in which you presented several questions related to the enforcement of Chapter 3794 of the Revised Code, Ohio’s smoke-free workplace act."
http://www.topix.com/forum/health/TK84DL6NTFQ...

WOW, Why would you even care about it and why would you go all the way back to 2008 to find it unless you were either threatened by her or simply a sociopath. Which is it?

goldstein wrote:

<quoted text>
WOW, Why would you even care about it and why would you go all the way back to 2008 to find it unless you were either threatened by her or simply a sociopath. Which is it?

I responded because you asked about it. I remembered reading that information in a post from 2010, which I linked to. It's unwise to reveal personal information on the internet, but many do.

goldstein wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm curious about why you knew Linda's full identity. Did you seek her out and actually go to the trouble of tracing her IP address to find this information? Why would you do that? Did you mean her harm? Have you so little in your life that you would choose to spend any amount of time tracking down a poster on Topix? etc.

Old Guy wrote:

Is there anyone on Topix didn't know her real name? I believe that Linda posted her full name by accident, when she posted a email to her from Lance Himes....http://www.topix.com/ forum/health/TK84DL6NTFQ7IANR3 /p29#c583

goldstein wrote:

<quoted text>
WOW, Why would you even care about it and why would you go all the way back to 2008 to find it unless you were either threatened by her or simply a sociopath. Which is it?

Old Guy wrote:

I responded because you asked about it. I remembered reading that information in a post from 2010, which I linked to. It's unwise to reveal personal information on the internet, but many do.

More, I recall reading a day or so ago your mention of going back through her posting over the years trying to get a better idea of the person who had died. Far from sociopathy or response to a threat. Perhaps too thoughtful a motivation for many here to understand.

Hugh, I've barely scratched the surface of the many posts in the smoking forums since 2006 --- there's just so many of them! It's fascinating to see the progression from a lot of participants in the early days, to the relatively few that continued to participate in the later years. And a careful reader can spot certain individuals by their writing style, no matter how much they change their name or conceal their location.

It's also interesting to see the differences between the two groups in the later years. One side seems much more likely to hide their location and to use the judgement icons.(And the use of the icons seems to have little to do with the content. "Spam" seems to be a common judgement, even though the comment is clearly not spam.) It's also obvious that some folks maintain multiple accounts, so that they can "out-judge" the other side.

Old Guy wrote:

Hugh, I've barely scratched the surface of the many posts in the smoking forums since 2006 --- there's just so many of them! It's fascinating to see the progression from a lot of participants in the early days, to the relatively few that continued to participate in the later years. And a careful reader can spot certain individuals by their writing style, no matter how much they change their name or conceal their location.

I don't envy you that task. Does it seem to you that there used to be more actual discussion of issues and less spitting cat stuff, or am I suffering from the quintessential "good old days" syndrome?

When I first ran into Topix, I didn't realize that it used cookies to automatically keep the same user name in place on a computer unless you proactively changed it. I thought the idea was to choose a user name that suited what I had to say. Forgetting to provide a user name resulted in the last one appearing, and I figured out what was going on.
Later, I chose to use different user names depending on the purpose of my post. Of course, the general run of people here don't see such subtleties and invariably mount all sorts of assaults and accusations based on the assumption--even though the content is so varied that it is clearly not the case--that the use of multiple names is "obviously" for the sake of having identical content appear to be coming from multiple posters and somehow give it undeserved credibility.

Old Guy wrote:

Hugh, I've barely scratched the surface of the many posts in the smoking forums since 2006 --- there's just so many of them! It's fascinating to see the progression from a lot of participants in the early days, to the relatively few that continued to participate in the later years. And a careful reader can spot certain individuals by their writing style, no matter how much they change their name or conceal their location.
It's also interesting to see the differences between the two groups in the later years. One side seems much more likely to hide their location and to use the judgement icons.(And the use of the icons seems to have little to do with the content. "Spam" seems to be a common judgement, even though the comment is clearly not spam.) It's also obvious that some folks maintain multiple accounts, so that they can "out-judge" the other side.

I have started threads from time to time, in order to have specific issues addressed. The beginning posts on those threads have occasionally been "judged" to be "off-topic", even though, by definition, they CREATED and EMBODIED the topic. Once they have a grasp of which terms are negative and which are positive, it seems a lot of these folks don't bother to distinguish among them.
I am not sure whether a registered user is limited as far as the icons are concerned. Even if they are, they could simply log off and assign icons as unregistered users, rather than maintaining other accounts to do that. I am not sure, even, whether the nature of the cookies Topix uses to automatically insert a user name would let an unregistered user revisit a post and "reenforce" judgment by repeating the same icon selection.