Vote for me TODAY; revote in progress and your previous vote didn't count

[Jenna]

Terminator deleted all previous votes and started a new thread about whether he should ban me. It closes at midnight tonight. Even if you voted already, it didn't count; you have to vote again here: http://www.lawenforcementforums.com/...ad.php?t=10008

The vote is very close--I'm ahead by a bit, but I was behind by a lot yesterday and it's been close to 50/50 for awhile. Only 55 have voted so far. The last time I checked in the previous "ban Jenna" poll, before Terminator deleted all the previous votes, about 85 percent of about 90 voters had voted to keep me.

I think re-starting the vote mid-election puts me at a disadvantage, because only people who feel strongly about me are going to be paying attention to the new thread and willing to wade through 4 pages of the previous thread to figure out what I did or didn't do to deserve banning. Since hate is a stronger emotion than casual tolerance, the new vote is likely to draw a disproportionate number of people who are out to get me. Based on their comments, it seems that lot of the people who voted in the previous round didn't feel strongly about me either way but didn't feel I deserved to be banned. I suspect that most of them are done with the topic and won't even click on this continuation thread, because they assume it's just another bunch of comments about me rather than a whole new vote. I talked to two people in chat last night who had voted for me and didn't seem likely to change their votes, and they didn't even know that their votes had been erased and they had to vote again.

So this thread is to ask all of you to please vote "no" on banning me in the new thread, even if you already voted in the first thread.

My campaign promise is that, starting now, I'll stop engaging in serious discussions about controversial political issues in posts, the chatroom, and private messages. I might still toss off the occasional political joke or self-parodying political remark, but I won't challenge your worldviews in a serious way. I'm here to learn from you, not argue with you. You're welcome to still kick me around and bash me as the leftist you "love to hate", but I won't fight back.

[OFK]

Jenna, don't do this...

[TheOldRhino]

You're welcome to still kick me around and bash me as the leftist you "love to hate", but I won't fight back.

But that's no fun.

[Crimebytes2]

Obviously, you've learned nothing from this whole ordeal.

[Willowdared]

Jenna, I've voted twice to not ban you, because I believe in freedom of speech.

I'm finding your whole "my employer is so elite just the mere mention of it will shatter the time-space continuum" argument rather offensive. If you don't want someone to connect the dots, maybe a more anonymous user name would have been an option?

You can certainly identify your profession, without naming your employer.

I remain dubious of your reasons for being here, but that's because your posts seem more speech-like then a true interchange of ideas. I wonder what you hope to achieve? Or is joining this, and other law enforcement message boards part of your job?

[Beans]

I don't get to come on here that often, but I am beginning to find this whole thing annoying. Jenna, as far as cops go, I am about as liberal as it gets. I went back and read some of your posts and they are so off the wall for a cop's web site that I am voting for you to be banned. I am sure there is a great liberal forum you could go on be with your peeps. Most cops are conservative and this is not the place for it. I have a lot of differing views than most people on here, but I keep it to myself. All it does is start a shit storm and I think you thrive on pissing people off. I can not believe you actually mean some of the things I have read.

[Buttercup]

Jenna, I've voted twice to not ban you, because I believe in freedom of speech.

I'm finding your whole "my employer is so elite just the mere mention of it will shatter the time-space continuum" argument rather offensive. If you don't want someone to connect the dots, maybe a more anonymous user name would have been an option?

You can certainly identify your profession, without naming your employer.

I remain dubious of your reasons for being here, but that's because your posts seem more speech-like then a true interchange of ideas. I wonder what you hope to achieve? Or is joining this, and other law enforcement message boards part of your job?

PDawg, those points are among those that bother me, although not as much as the fact that she voices support for illegal activites on a law enforcement forum.

Whatever industry you're in or profession you have, Jenna, you can easily camouflage its "sensitivity" by using appropriate language and you obviously have the vocabulary to do so if you choose. I don't work in LE and I've had no qualms about divulging my affiliation with LE or my profession and industry, and in any conversations I am very careful to not violate any of my extremely restrictive secrecy agreements because you never know who might be reading and what their affiliations might be. Yes, many industries/professions require a degree of confidentiality, some more so than others, but as someone else stated in one of the myriad of threads, unless "President of the United States" is your job, there's no reason to be unable to give a general description. Even then, "I work for the federal government" would suffice. You get more attention by declining to do so and offering excuses, but I suppose that negative attention is still attention.

[Cst.SB]

My campaign promise is that, starting now, I'll stop engaging in serious discussions about controversial political issues in posts, the chatroom, and private messages.

Full Stop right here!

First, I want to say sorry if I had any part of this whole "vote" thing. That was never my intent. The couple of "jenna" posts I started were to get your attention and others.

I much rather get into a debate with you, than for you to simply say nothing, or to just agree to agree, or even agree to disagree.

It is important to discuss different view points, and though, I disagree with many of the things you say, at least I think about them. And that's important.

[Hearmoretalkless]

Debate.

Exchange of ideas.

Don't roll over and die. If you don't mind to get kicked around like a red-headed step-child, then put up a good fight. Don't give in so you don't get banned, but don't go trolling for a fight either.

This is a pro-cop site and emotions run high (in my limited experience) so just tone down the 'rant'-y nature, the speech-iness of your posts.

That's all, nothing more to see here.

[conalabu]

Debate.

Exchange of ideas.

Don't roll over and die. If you don't mind to get kicked around like a red-headed step-child, then put up a good fight. Don't give in so you don't get banned, but don't go trolling for a fight either.

This is a pro-cop site and emotions run high (in my limited experience) so just tone down the 'rant'-y nature, the speech-iness of your posts.

That's all, nothing more to see here.

huh. This is the second thread of yours I have read. You seem a little too normal to be new.