Not location specific, No rules: Welcome to ILX heaven

SERIOUS POSTER IS SERIOUS

Did you mail to her, Michael? What did she say?

thanks, remy, for the response. I didn't mean to be accusing people of planning an "assault" or anything, I was just voicing my concern for the people who were hurt in the situation(s) off-board as someone who can get pretty up-in-arms about privacy. you and chaki obviously know them far better than I do, and I didn't mean to sound really critical of the decisions you guys, and anyone else involved, made. the last thing I want to do is pick sides in this, because I don't think I have any right to be involved.

This is kind of an odd moral point: if you're attached to a person that doesn't exist (or who exists in significantly different terms than the ones with which you had been presented) is it fair or is it self-deluding to extend to the real person same charity and kindness you would extend to the less honest front to which you were attached?

I can't imagine the affection you all felt for Luna is totally diminished, just confused and kind of misplaced. There's still gotta be some human attachment, right?

I wasn't especially friendly with her, and this really doesn't change my opinion at all. If I were close, I'd probably email her with something non-accusatory, but I also expect I'm gonna be the kind of prick that lets my wife cheat on me a lot.

(thanks michael)

Despite her own anger, Jessi couldn't turn her back completely on Montgomery. He was all that remained of her lost Tommy, after all. "If he existed I would still be holding him everynight and sharing dreams with him everynight," she wrote Montgomery. He remarked bitterly that she could "fill that void" with a different admirer. But Jessi continued to placate him, saying, "I ache to be with Tommy," noting that the 18-year-old existed in Montgomery's continued love for her. Jessi promised Montgomery she would stop talking to Barrett, saying she took up with him mainly to get revenge. Her existence was a "living hell," she said, and she just wanted "everyone to hurt" like she did

http://web.rollins.edu/~srubarth/personal/jimmy_harvey.jpg

I don't think all of her emotions she wrote about in ILX are fake, even if some "facts" about her life might be. Even compulsory liars don't lie about everything, I assume - it'd be almost impossible to keep up a faced like that for years, I think. So I don't think the emotional attachment is totally diminished, no.

why are we affording basic human courtesy to someone who lied to & hurt like 10 difft honest ppl on ilx? and oops too

"faced" = "facade"

wow it's up to 10 now

This is kind of an odd moral point: if you're attached to a person that doesn't exist (or who exists in significantly different terms than the ones with which you had been presented) is it fair or is it self-deluding to extend to the real person same charity and kindness you would extend to the less honest front to which you were attached?

it very much depends on you, doesn't it? by which i mean: there's no right or wrong answer to that one.

i barely had any interaction with luna at all so -- like you, remy -- i'm not "affected" by this in any way other than a coo-ur-gosh-ILX-eh? one. but i do think it would be a shame if someone who did have fond online dealings with the internet persona known as luna decided not to e-mail them now because of what a whole lot of other people were saying. but that's not being condemnatory: i can also appreciate that, if you're feeling a bit hurt and confused, the last thing you might want to do is send that e-mail.

i dunno. i feel like a bit of a voyeur here, TBH. this has absolutely fuck all to do with me, really. although i do think luna once complimented me on a WDYLL thread ;)

why are we affording basic human courtesy to someone who lied to & hurt like 10 difft honest ppl on ilx?

"one of us" vs "not one of us"

I would like to think I extend basic human charity to all basic humans.

I think the main beef here is the screwing-people-over one, not the "fake vs. real" one.

it's all part of the same thing, though, isn't it?

What I don't get is, why didn't any of these 10 people she supposedly fooled call her bluff on ILX? Well okay, obviously they were shamed, but wouldn't that have been the best way to get back at her, and also warn eveyone else not to make the same mistake?

Sure. xpost

Because it's humiliating, Tuomas!

you guys:

the stuff she's written about her son has been consistent throughout the years

The kid that turned 10 in 2007 (see upthread, 12th September) but that was 4 in January 2003?

-- onimo, Tuesday, October 16, 2007 3:06 AM (6 hours ago) Bookmark Link

Explaining humiliating may take some time there.

Laurel put my intentions beautifully. Thank you, Laurel. Guys, this is someone who was/is purposefully preying on vulnerable posters to this community, stalked me at work and lied to everyone about everything. Bottom fucking line.

Michael White, do you have a "side of the story" to relay?

why are we affording basic human courtesy to someone who lied to & hurt like 10 difft honest ppl on ilx? and oops too

-- and what

^^^^^^^ THIS

Also, yes its up to like 8-10 guys now.

What I don't get is, why didn't any of these 10 people she supposedly fooled call her bluff on ILX?

HI DERE

Yeah, I dunno -- not all of them were super dramatic, some of the people who got stood up or whatever were never more than casually involved to begin with, so they just said WHATEVS and got on w/ their lives. They didn't realize it was a repeat event, though.

Hah xp

the ones who actually made it up to internet boyfriend status still seem to be pretty invested in the idea that shes their internet girlfriend

Some of them were (and, apparently, ARE) super-dramatic, though. :/

well, one changed his myspace to say "single", at least

although thanks to chaki im sure theres a lot of 'explaining' going on right now

to catch a cyber predator...

My brane is still scrabbling for purchase on some of this. I hope you guys can see yr way clear to making a well-rounded Wikipedia page for the whole affair. I'm sure wardBOOI will staunchly defend it from vandalism for us.

theres a lot of 'explaining' going on right now
http://www.echo.ucla.edu/Volume5-Issue1/stilwell-media/Desi_Arnaz2.jpg
Luna!

m. white - chk yr webmail

o wau, it's like this holy perfect storm of one outsider mooching into one of the "nice" ILX threads with a glib snark, then it's as if the portal to the dark side has been opened and

suddenly the other daemons are all up in here trampling cake into the carpet and mocking the records, the nice girls are crying and

unnoticed in the corner, a soft indie lad is on the phone to Luna who is professing love to him.

CAKE DAEMONS

MEFONDANTOPHOLES

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/original/predator_hansen_nbc.jpg

LUCIFER BUTTERCREAM

stet OTMFM 4 LIFE IDST

wake me up when someone starts outing luna's net-bf's.

That already started.

poor Lucifer Buttercream

I'd like to order a hashmallim-chocolate three layer cake, with cherub-marzipan filling and a cream chesus seraphrosting

heres the list so far

1. Dom Passantino
2. chicago kevin
3. max r
4. Heave Ho
5. ghost rider
6. Jordan Sargent
7. BIG HOOS aka the steendriver
8. Dr Morbius
9. Alfred, Lord Sotosyn
10. darraghmac
11. Oilyrags

one of them who still thinks he's her bf (long time poster, older, british, hasnt posted in a while, has never met her irl) has been im-ing people telling them that im just mad cuz luna wouldnt go on "secret dates" with me which is complete bullshit (newsflash to you older former-ilxor: i actually get girls in..you know... real life. and i dont have to stalk them at work even!). so she's still got her fake claws in at least one former ilxor. the one who was her "public" ilx bf that alot of you knew about now is single on myspace (yesterday in a relationship) and his LJ just says "no" where yesterday it was full of stuff.

also, Trayce, who has been calling my claims "baseless" all week and posted this last night:

Are you pissed off because she wouldnt fuck you, or something?

-- Trayce, Monday, October 15, 2007 10:43 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

sent this to me last night:

Trayce to me

show details
11:11 pm (10 hours ago)
FWIW though dude, I knew ALL of what Luna's supposedly done, already.
Have done for ages. Doesnt mean it bothers me or I care.

So thanks for being a two faced jackass Trayce and trying to make it look like i was lying when you knew i was telling the truth all along.

Fuck you.

thanks for that post before your last one chaki. it's none of my business beyond me knowing that guy and having talked with him about this a little in the past (like a lot of ilxors whether in london or elsewhere) but that info does at least make situation clearer after this 500 post meltdown.

to be fair chaki it probly sucks to attempt the luna game and find out nobody even wants to be your internet boyfriend

the ones who actually made it up to internet boyfriend status still seem to be pretty invested in the idea that shes their internet girlfriend

---there's a fuckin shock

I'm pretty sure this thread isn't the right place to be nastily telling Trayce off but uh why the hell did she attack Chaki online AND THEN ADMIT to being a hypocrite and/or just stupid in private convo? SOMEONE MAKE SENSE Jesus Christ.

i dont know that makes no sense to me either.