On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 4:34:03 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Kalmia" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 10:45:19 AM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> > He cares? He called her nasty names and brought the web page to .
> > everyone's attention just to ridicule her.
>
> Maybe ridicule was his intent, BUT it brings to light the fact that this
> mother stupidly blasted a lot of personal info about her dtr. That's all
> we're trying to get across, but J just won't see the danger in it. She'd
> rather get mired in talk about Windows etc.
>
> The time she's spent defending herself and saying she just doesn't care
> could have been spent in contacting Frontier or whomever.
>
> I'm still hoping that her buddy Ophelia will convince her to do something to
> eradicate that page. Perchance, she's typing an eml to her right now.
>
> ---
>
> Ding, ding, ding! Social networking sites! People put up a lot more
> information than I do! Or did.

Well, you're not the only idiot in town. GET IT?

I thought you were going to let this thread die finally. Ha. Gotta have the last word. Are you trying for longest thread in history?

On Wed, 07 Jan 2015 19:31:29 -0400, wrote:

>On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:
>>"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 1/7/2015 9:12 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bryan seems to care more about her than
>>>> you do.
>>>>
>>> He cares? He called her nasty names and brought the web page to
>>> everyone's attention just to ridicule her.
>>
>>There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman pedophile.
>>Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>there,

Somebody here is sick alright, but it isn't Cindy.

>She might be misguided as to that pervs motives but her advice to you
>was excellent, get the page down! If you have pics of her on FB you
>should also remove them, don't be so damn naive.

That damned page provides everything a paedophile could ever wish for
if they wanted to 'groom' her: name, DOB, location, school, personal
interests... Will it happen? probably not, but why take such an
unnecessary risk? Does her daughter even know the page exists?

"Janet B" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
> snip
>>
>>There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman pedophile.
>>Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>there,
>
> just shakes head. . .

Perhaps we should ban all cameras and pics then, huh? Catalogs should never
have pics of people in them because someone might masturbate to them. Oh
but what of those with a shoe fetish? Ban all the shoe pics?

Do you see where I am going with the?

*Just shakes head...*

On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 18:17:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Janet B" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>>
>>>There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman pedophile.
>>>Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>>there,
>>
>> just shakes head. . .
>
>Perhaps we should ban all cameras and pics then, huh? Catalogs should never
>have pics of people in them because someone might masturbate to them. Oh
>but what of those with a shoe fetish? Ban all the shoe pics?
>
>Do you see where I am going with the?
>
>*Just shakes head...*

Unbelievable. I have no idea how you manage to get through each day
without a team of helpers. You should be institutionalised.

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 02:10:59 -0600, Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 06 Jan 2015 17:10:53 -0500, Gary wrote:
>>
>>> Wrong. What the hell is wrong with all of you.
>>> The dance page was fine. She looked very happy.
>>> Give it a rest.
>>
>> When I look at those pictures I see how easily Julie is swindled.
>
> In this case, by a "professional" photographer.

Seeing as how nobody here has any idea what price I paid, they could not
possibly say that. I am pleased with the pics and that's all that matters.

On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Janet B" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > snip
> >>
> >>There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman pedophile.
> >>Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
> >>there,

It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
broad outline of a target.

> > just shakes head. . .
>
> Perhaps we should ban all cameras and pics then, huh? Catalogs should never
> have pics of people in them because someone might masturbate to them. Oh
> but what of those with a shoe fetish? Ban all the shoe pics?
>
> Do you see where I am going with the?
>
> *Just shakes head...*

Surely even you can distinguish between a consenting adult and
a minor child.

Cindy Hamilton

On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> snip
>>>>
>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman pedophile.
>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>>> there,
>
> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
> broad outline of a target.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!

Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their
interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the
street and being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info
at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.

It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
anyone is concerned.

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> snip
>>>>>
>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>>>> there,
>>
>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>> broad outline of a target.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!
>
> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their interest
> piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the street and
> being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info at their
> fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>
> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
> anyone is concerned.

And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've never
had a website, have you? I don't really care to hear facts about sickos.
People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't do.
Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for something
he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...

And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an every
day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up. Just look in
your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads! Perhaps you should track down
the parents of those kids and give them the same warning if you are so
concerned.

On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 11:57:39 AM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:

> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!

Not really beating. More like tapping lightly. I'll probably get
bored with it before (a) I experience any pain, or (b) Julie wises
up and calls Frontier.

Cindy Hamilton

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
...
> On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 11:57:39 AM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!
>
> Not really beating. More like tapping lightly. I'll probably get
> bored with it before (a) I experience any pain, or (b) Julie wises
> up and calls Frontier.

Again, calling them would do nothing.

On Thursday, January 8, 2015 11:36:47 AM UTC-6, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>
> I'll probably get
> bored with it before (a) I experience any pain, or (b) Julie wises
> up and calls Frontier.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
>
Don't hold your breath, that attention whore is just playing stupid (not really hard for her to do anyway) and she's lapping all this attention up like a cat laps up cream.

In article >, says...


> I don't really care to hear facts about sickos.
> People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't do.
>
So, as an ignorant mother you feel absolutely no obligation or
responsibility to protect your daughter's safety privacy or security.

We'd already guessed.

Janet UK

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:33:03 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> snip
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>>>>> there,
>>>
>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!
>>
>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
>> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their interest
>> piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the street and
>> being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info at their
>> fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>
>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
>> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
>> anyone is concerned.
>
>And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've never
>had a website, have you? I don't really care to hear facts about sickos.
>People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't do.
>Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for something
>he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...
>
>And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an every
>day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up. Just look in
>your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads! Perhaps you should track down
>the parents of those kids and give them the same warning if you are so
>concerned.

Last time I looked, catalogs and ads didn't contain the names of any
of their child models.

Doris

"Doris Night" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:33:03 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing
>>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>>> there,
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>
>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
>>> hurt!
>>>
>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
>>> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their
>>> interest
>>> piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the street and
>>> being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info at their
>>> fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>>
>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
>>> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
>>> anyone is concerned.
>>
>>And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've never
>>had a website, have you? I don't really care to hear facts about sickos.
>>People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't do.
>>Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for
>>something
>>he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...
>>
>>And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an
>>every
>>day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up. Just look
>>in
>>your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads! Perhaps you should track down
>>the parents of those kids and give them the same warning if you are so
>>concerned.
>
> Last time I looked, catalogs and ads didn't contain the names of any
> of their child models.

Wouldn't be hard to find out the names. And many do give the names.

Doris Night > wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:33:03 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing indecent
>>>>>>> there,
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>
>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!
>>>
>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
>>> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their interest
>>> piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the street and
>>> being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info at their
>>> fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>>
>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
>>> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
>>> anyone is concerned.
>>
>> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've never
>> had a website, have you? I don't really care to hear facts about sickos.
>> People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't do.
>> Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for something
>> he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...
>>
>> And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an every
>> day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up. Just look in
>> your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads! Perhaps you should track down
>> the parents of those kids and give them the same warning if you are so
>> concerned.
>
> Last time I looked, catalogs and ads didn't contain the names of any
> of their child models.
>
> Doris

Or birthdates. Or location.
--
jinx the minx

"barbie gee" > wrote in message
hcrg.pbz...
>
>
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>>
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing
>>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>>> there,
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>
>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
>>> hurt!
>>>
>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
>>> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their
>>> interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the
>>> street and being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info
>>> at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>>
>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
>>> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
>>> anyone is concerned.
>>
>> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've
>> never had a website, have you?
>
> Well, yeah, actually that IS how it works. You'd have to prove you're
> Julie Bove, but they'd have to take it down.
>
> The site asks for some approval to run Quicktime, but if you decline that,
> you can still see your website from whenever it was created, along with
> your statement that you ARE A WRITER, which you keep denying you ever
> said.
> "... I'm a writer and a stay at home Mom. I have a variety of interests,
> including making all sorts of crafts. I also love animals, especially cats
> (mine is named Maui) and squirrels. I love raw vegetables and enjoy
> growing them in my garden. I highly recommend raw coconut oil for
> everyone! You should eat 1-2 T. each day and it's also wonderful for your
> skin and hair. "
>
> But yeah, continue believing it's not your site, you know nothing about it
> and don't care if it exists. It's not a fake, it's clearly YOUR content.

I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take it
down. I would have to FTP some blank pages or something onto there which
I'm not going to take the time to do. I didn't put it there and I'm not
going to bother taking it down. Whatever is there is old information. Maui
is dead. And you are mean!

On 1/8/2015 12:33 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> snip
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing
>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>> there,
>>>
>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>
>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta hurt!
>>
>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a
>> teenager now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have
>> their interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down
>> the street and being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that
>> info at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>
>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete
>> my old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp
>> why anyone is concerned.
>
> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that.

ISP's don't do WHAT? Don't get bought out, merge, get taken over,
absorb previous web sites? Truly clueless.

> But you've
> never had a website, have you?

Nope, but I use photo-hosting sites. I've had assholes post links to
pictures of me they thought were unflattering. I'm not concerned with
how people think I look. I'm an adult, I put the pictures there. It's
not the same thing as posting pictures of your daughter with her DOB,
where she lives, etc. for all the world to see.

> I don't really care to hear facts about
> sickos. People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't
> do. Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for
> something he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...
>
Give me a ****ing break. Rape victims? Tell you what, if your daughter
is stalked or raped (I certainly hope not) the defense attorney just
might blame YOU for broadcasting her personal information all over the
place.

> And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an
> every day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up.
> Just look in your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads!

My mailbox? Sorry, I don't get tons of catalogs and ads. My mailbox
does not runneth over. You seem to be the one with that particular problem.

Jill

On 1/8/2015 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
> I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take
> it down. I would have to FTP some blank pages or something

BULLSHIT.

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/8/2015 12:33 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing
>>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>>> there,
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>
>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
>>> hurt!
>>>
>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a
>>> teenager now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have
>>> their interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down
>>> the street and being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that
>>> info at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>>
>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete
>>> my old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp
>>> why anyone is concerned.
>>
>> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that.
>
> ISP's don't do WHAT? Don't get bought out, merge, get taken over, absorb
> previous web sites? Truly clueless.
>
>> But you've
>> never had a website, have you?
>
> Nope, but I use photo-hosting sites. I've had assholes post links to
> pictures of me they thought were unflattering. I'm not concerned with how
> people think I look. I'm an adult, I put the pictures there. It's not
> the same thing as posting pictures of your daughter with her DOB, where
> she lives, etc. for all the world to see.
>
>> I don't really care to hear facts about
>> sickos. People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't
>> do. Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for
>> something he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...
>>
> Give me a ****ing break. Rape victims? Tell you what, if your daughter
> is stalked or raped (I certainly hope not) the defense attorney just might
> blame YOU for broadcasting her personal information all over the place.
>
Hardly. I do have lawyer friends. And *I* am not the one who put up that
link. As I have said repeatedly, I never had a website at Frontier. *I*
haven't had a website in years. That's an old site with old information.

>> And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an
>> every day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up.
>> Just look in your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads!
>
> My mailbox? Sorry, I don't get tons of catalogs and ads. My mailbox does
> not runneth over. You seem to be the one with that particular problem.

My point is, there are countless pictures of people out there all the time.
In the newspaper even! Why don't you go after my mom for allowing my name
and pic to be put in there when I was 7!? Oh I was wearing dancewear too!
Not my costume because she hadn't finished making it. I was the only one of
us who was in her leotard.

For that matter, you should go after schools and the people who publish
yearbooks!

This is just beyond ridiculous and I am going to try my damndest to stay out
of this thread now.

On 1/8/2015 12:52 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 11:57:39 AM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
>>
>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
>>> hurt!
>>
>> Not really beating. More like tapping lightly. I'll probably get
>> bored with it before (a) I experience any pain, or (b) Julie wises
>> up and calls Frontier.
>
> Again, calling them would do nothing.


You don't have to call. Sign into your account and click Contact Us.
Send them an email asking them to take down the old Verizon web page.
That would waste what, 5 minutes of your precious time?

Jill

"Julie Bove" > wrote:
> "barbie gee" > wrote in message
> hcrg.pbz...
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message >>
>>> ...
>>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman >>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing >>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>>>> there,
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>>
>>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta >>> hurt!
>>>>
>>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a
>>>> teenager >>> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to
>>>> have their >>> interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by
>>>> walking down the >>> street and being spotted by someone of that ilk.
>>>> Having all that info >>> at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO
>>>> much easier for them.
>>>>
>>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>>> >>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please
>>>>>>> delete my >>> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she
>>>>>>> doesn't grasp why >>> anyone is concerned.
>>>
>>> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've >>
>>> never had a website, have you?
>>
>> Well, yeah, actually that IS how it works. You'd have to prove you're >
>> Julie Bove, but they'd have to take it down.
>>
>> The site asks for some approval to run Quicktime, but if you decline
>> that, > you can still see your website from whenever it was created,
>> along with > your statement that you ARE A WRITER, which you keep denying you ever > said.
>> "... I'm a writer and a stay at home Mom. I have a variety of interests,
>> > including making all sorts of crafts. I also love animals, especially
>>> cats > (mine is named Maui) and squirrels. I love raw vegetables and
>>> enjoy > growing them in my garden. I highly recommend raw coconut oil
>>> for > everyone! You should eat 1-2 T. each day and it's also wonderful
>>> for your > skin and hair. "
>>
>> But yeah, continue believing it's not your site, you know nothing about
>> it > and don't care if it exists. It's not a fake, it's clearly YOUR content.
>
> I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take it
> down. I would have to FTP some blank pages or something onto there which
> I'm not going to take the time to do. I didn't put it there and I'm not
> going to bother taking it down. Whatever is there is old information.
> Maui is dead. And you are mean!

If you abandon your old car out in the woods, does it make it no longer
your car?
--
jinx the minx

On 1/8/2015 6:58 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
> This is just beyond ridiculous and I am going to try my damndest to stay
> out of this thread now.

Again I cry BULLSHIT. You started an entirely new thread about this web
site thing. The original mention of it was pretty much buried in an
completely unrelated thread. You could have just let it die but you didn't.

Jill

jinx the minx wrote:
>Doris Nightnurse wrote:
>
>> Last time I looked, catalogs and ads didn't contain the names of any
>> of their child models.
>
>Or birthdates. Or location.

I had to look twice... I thought Doris was speaking of birthdates and
lactation. Everytime I see Doris Night I see Doris Nightnurse.

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 15:17:23 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"barbie gee" > wrote in message
ghcrg.pbz...
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing
>>>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>>>> there,
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>>
>>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
>>>> hurt!
>>>>
>>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a teenager
>>>> now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have their
>>>> interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down the
>>>> street and being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that info
>>>> at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>>>
>>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete my
>>>> old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp why
>>>> anyone is concerned.
>>>
>>> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that. But you've
>>> never had a website, have you?
>>
>> Well, yeah, actually that IS how it works. You'd have to prove you're
>> Julie Bove, but they'd have to take it down.
>>
>> The site asks for some approval to run Quicktime, but if you decline that,
>> you can still see your website from whenever it was created, along with
>> your statement that you ARE A WRITER, which you keep denying you ever
>> said.
>> "... I'm a writer and a stay at home Mom. I have a variety of interests,
>> including making all sorts of crafts. I also love animals, especially cats
>> (mine is named Maui) and squirrels. I love raw vegetables and enjoy
>> growing them in my garden. I highly recommend raw coconut oil for
>> everyone! You should eat 1-2 T. each day and it's also wonderful for your
>> skin and hair. "
>>
>> But yeah, continue believing it's not your site, you know nothing about it
>> and don't care if it exists. It's not a fake, it's clearly YOUR content.
>
>I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take it
>down. I would have to FTP some blank pages or something onto there which
>I'm not going to take the time to do. I didn't put it there and I'm not
>going to bother taking it down. Whatever is there is old information. Maui
>is dead.

WTF are you bringing up a dead cat here... extremely inappropriate...
should be you, a useless *diseased* POS.

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 15:17:23 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>"barbie gee" > wrote in message
ghcrg.pbz...
>> But yeah, continue believing it's not your site, you know nothing about it
>> and don't care if it exists. It's not a fake, it's clearly YOUR content.
>
>I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take it
>down.

LMAO. One again, Bove has apparently found yet another big exception
to everyone else's experiences in life. An ISP that hosts web sites...
but won't take them down. Pure gold

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 21:04:25 -0600, barbie gee >
wrote:

>On Thu, 8 Jan 2015, jmcquown wrote:
>
>> On 1/8/2015 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>> I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take
>>> it down. I would have to FTP some blank pages or something
>>
>> BULLSHIT.
>
>Exactly. Ridiculous excuses.
>But she doesn't care, so there ya go.

What's really going on is, she will reject advice or anything else she
perceives as being told what to do. It's as simple as that. It might
not make sense to anyone else, but that's her line of thinking.

On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 5:37:54 PM UTC-6, jmcquown wrote:
> On 1/8/2015 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
> > I admitted that it *was* my website. Was. And no, the ISP won't take
> > it down. I would have to FTP some blank pages or something
>
> BULLSHIT.
>
> Jill

She's a pathological liar. I feel sorry for the girl, being raised by such an awful excuse for a person.

On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 5:59:07 PM UTC-6, jmcquown wrote:
> On 1/8/2015 12:52 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
> >
> > "Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On Thursday, January 8, 2015 at 11:57:39 AM UTC-5, jmcquown wrote:
> >>
> >>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
> >>> hurt!
> >>
> >> Not really beating. More like tapping lightly. I'll probably get
> >> bored with it before (a) I experience any pain, or (b) Julie wises
> >> up and calls Frontier.
> >
> > Again, calling them would do nothing.
>
>
> You don't have to call. Sign into your account and click Contact Us.
> Send them an email asking them to take down the old Verizon web page.
> That would waste what, 5 minutes of your precious time?

She might miss out on a chat room and a can of diet soda.

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...
>
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 1/8/2015 12:33 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 1/8/2015 9:53 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, January 7, 2015 9:17:28 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>> "Janet B" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:32:05 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are a lot of sick people here. Maybe Cindy is a woman
>>>>>>>> pedophile.
>>>>>>>> Otherwise why would she fixate on such things? I had nothing
>>>>>>>> indecent
>>>>>>>> there,
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't have to be indecent. Someone who is so inclined
>>>>> can fill in the details himself, once you've proved the
>>>>> broad outline of a target.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>>>>
>>>> Cindy, you're beating your head against a brick wall. That's gotta
>>>> hurt!
>>>>
>>>> Fact: People who prey on children or teens (her daughter is a
>>>> teenager now) don't have to see "indecent" pictures in order to have
>>>> their interest piqued. Kids can become targets simply by walking down
>>>> the street and being spotted by someone of that ilk. Having all that
>>>> info at their fingertips just makes things SOOOOO much easier for them.
>>>>
>>>> It would take about what, 3-5 minutes for her to log into her Frontier
>>>> account, click on Contact Us and write an email saying "please delete
>>>> my old Verizon web site". She won't bother because she doesn't grasp
>>>> why anyone is concerned.
>>>
>>> And that's not how it works, Jill. ISP's don't do that.
>>
>> ISP's don't do WHAT? Don't get bought out, merge, get taken over, absorb
>> previous web sites? Truly clueless.
>>
>>> But you've
>>> never had a website, have you?
>>
>> Nope, but I use photo-hosting sites. I've had assholes post links to
>> pictures of me they thought were unflattering. I'm not concerned with
>> how people think I look. I'm an adult, I put the pictures there. It's
>> not the same thing as posting pictures of your daughter with her DOB,
>> where she lives, etc. for all the world to see.
>>
>>> I don't really care to hear facts about
>>> sickos. People will do what they will regardless of what I did or didn't
>>> do. Talking like that you sound like you would blame a rape victim for
>>> something he/she said or did or didn't do or wore or...
>>>
>> Give me a ****ing break. Rape victims? Tell you what, if your daughter
>> is stalked or raped (I certainly hope not) the defense attorney just
>> might blame YOU for broadcasting her personal information all over the
>> place.
>>
> Hardly. I do have lawyer friends. And *I* am not the one who put up that
> link. As I have said repeatedly, I never had a website at Frontier. *I*
> haven't had a website in years. That's an old site with old information.
>
>>> And if someone wants a pic of a kid, there are so many out there on an
>>> every day basis, they certainly wouldn't need to be looking mine up.
>>> Just look in your mailbox. All those catalogs and ads!
>>
>> My mailbox? Sorry, I don't get tons of catalogs and ads. My mailbox
>> does not runneth over. You seem to be the one with that particular
>> problem.
>
> My point is, there are countless pictures of people out there all the
> time. In the newspaper even! Why don't you go after my mom for allowing
> my name and pic to be put in there when I was 7!? Oh I was wearing
> dancewear too! Not my costume because she hadn't finished making it. I
> was the only one of us who was in her leotard.
>
> For that matter, you should go after schools and the people who publish
> yearbooks!
>
> This is just beyond ridiculous and I am going to try my damndest to stay
> out of this thread now.

It would be much better if you could. After all, it is your child, your
family and your decision. Everyone seems to have an opinion, but it not
their concern. So ... If they get no response ...

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 1/6/2015 5:10 PM, Gary wrote:
> Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>
>> Julie Bove wrote:
>>> "Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You don't care that you made your daughter a net skank... sicko!
>>>
>>> there is nothing skanky there.
>>
>> You made your daughter appear a CHEAP SKANK!
>
> Wrong. What the hell is wrong with all of you.
> The dance page was fine. She looked very happy.
> Give it a rest.
>
>> Only a ho puts their kids on the net.
>
> And only a turd puts their kitties on the net.
>
Here, I'll share another one. With everything going on in my life
lately, my poor Maine Coon's coat got very neglected. I finally had a
chance to take him to the groomer and they had to give him a lion cut.
He actually seems a lot more happy.

http://i59.tinypic.com/4ict2x.jpg


--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On Fri, 09 Jan 2015 19:53:50 -0500, Cheryl >
wrote:

>On 1/6/2015 5:10 PM, Gary wrote:
>> Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>
>>> Julie Bove wrote:
>>>> "Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't care that you made your daughter a net skank... sicko!
>>>>
>>>> there is nothing skanky there.
>>>
>>> You made your daughter appear a CHEAP SKANK!
>>
>> Wrong. What the hell is wrong with all of you.
>> The dance page was fine. She looked very happy.
>> Give it a rest.
>>
>>> Only a ho puts their kids on the net.
>>
>> And only a turd puts their kitties on the net.
>>
>Here, I'll share another one. With everything going on in my life
>lately, my poor Maine Coon's coat got very neglected. I finally had a
>chance to take him to the groomer and they had to give him a lion cut.
>He actually seems a lot more happy.
>
>http://i59.tinypic.com/4ict2x.jpg

I wish I had known about that cut for Puff the Manx.. In the winter
she matted up like wool.
Janet US

On 1/5/2015 6:44 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Jeßus" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 5 Jan 2015 15:16:40 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> My computer was
>>> running Win95 then and I got it when it was newly on the market. So new
>>> that the person I bought the computer from hadn't even heard of it. I had
>>> the very first version.
>>
>> No you didnt.
>
> Gawd! A computer store that didn't know about Win95 when it's release date
> had been known for a solid year. Or did not get a pre-release copy for NFR?
> Pass the popcorn, this is getting good.

In 1995 I was still running DOS and didn't even go to Win 3.1 until a
year later or so. I didn't even go to Win 95 until close to 2000 or so.
I just didn't like it. I didn't even like Win 3.1 or even 3.11 but it
was a little better. I probably would have ended up a *nix person but I
didn't know any at the time.


--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 1/6/2015 3:31 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> To "you" doesn't mean shit. So now instead of building and reselling they
> just upgraded., Which BTW businesses do not typically do as they depreciate
> their investments and buy new to depreciate those all over again. From an
> accounting perspective it makes no sense to put new money into old
> technology. If you add 200 bucks to a computer that was 179'd already then
> you can only depreciate that 200 buck expense which is a waste on paper.
> That simply is not how it works in business.

Not on topic, but this is how I got into IT. I bought a computer in the
late 80s, started finding out about upgrading RAM, hard drives, and then
one day the power supply smoked, the thing shut down and was turned into
a brick. I had it in my head that since I could replace other parts, I
could replace the PSU too. So I bought one, easy to do because there
weren't so many differences like atx or at, found out that to get to it
everything had to come off of the motherboard, and in one try I put it
all back together and it worked again. I was hooked.

My now 15 year old nephew built his own server the same way several
years ago. Made a Christmas list with the specific parts he wanted, and
then got to putting it together and that server still runs his games
that he and his friends play via Internet to this day.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 1/5/2015 6:18 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> Apparently you know more than they do because the problem could be on either
> end or in between and no email reader will fix that. BTW p;ings are not at
> all conclusive as it is SOP to turn off ICMP in firewalls. Something else
> the "tech" didn't know apparently.

My ISP constantly gets ****ed off at me when i neglect to mention that
fact when I need their help. I have Verizon and with all of their
upgrades lately they keep taking down my Internet. I mention stealth
mode and they get ****ed off. Oh well.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 1/5/2015 6:21 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:

> It would still work fine. FTP is a 35 year old protocol and nothing has
> changed since the day it was released. Your old FTP program would work just
> fine. In fact IE would work just fine. Just choose "View this site in
> Windows Explorer" in IE. IE is free.

No one in any right mind would allow FTP. It's all SFTP now. And yes,
you'd need an app that can support that port. But CuteFTP does.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 1/7/2015 6:31 PM, wrote:

> She might be misguided as to that pervs motives but her advice to you
> was excellent, get the page down! If you have pics of her on FB you
> should also remove them, don't be so damn naive.

For now, facebook is actually stable about limiting who can see what. We
use Facebook to share family pictures but as has happened in the past, a
glitch or configuration mistake could make everything public so the
advice is good to be careful about what you post on faceboook.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 1/9/2015 7:58 PM, wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Jan 2015 19:53:50 -0500, Cheryl >
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/6/2015 5:10 PM, Gary wrote:
>>> Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>> "Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't care that you made your daughter a net skank... sicko!
>>>>>
>>>>> there is nothing skanky there.
>>>>
>>>> You made your daughter appear a CHEAP SKANK!
>>>
>>> Wrong. What the hell is wrong with all of you.
>>> The dance page was fine. She looked very happy.
>>> Give it a rest.
>>>
>>>> Only a ho puts their kids on the net.
>>>
>>> And only a turd puts their kitties on the net.
>>>
>> Here, I'll share another one. With everything going on in my life
>> lately, my poor Maine Coon's coat got very neglected. I finally had a
>> chance to take him to the groomer and they had to give him a lion cut.
>> He actually seems a lot more happy.
>>
>> http://i59.tinypic.com/4ict2x.jpg
>
> Cute - but I notice he has his back to you, that indicates what he
> thinks of his new hair do
>

LOL He was hard to photograph. He kept moving around and every shot I
got of him was fuzzy. This was the first one I could get of him that
turned out. My niece just fell in love with him when she and her
brother stayed here while their mom was still in the hospital and she
kept calling him cuddly. I sent her a picture and she said he isn't
cuddly anymore. lol

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

On 1/9/2015 7:57 PM, Janet B wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Jan 2015 19:53:50 -0500, Cheryl >
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/6/2015 5:10 PM, Gary wrote:
>>> Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>> "Brooklyn1 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't care that you made your daughter a net skank... sicko!
>>>>>
>>>>> there is nothing skanky there.
>>>>
>>>> You made your daughter appear a CHEAP SKANK!
>>>
>>> Wrong. What the hell is wrong with all of you.
>>> The dance page was fine. She looked very happy.
>>> Give it a rest.
>>>
>>>> Only a ho puts their kids on the net.
>>>
>>> And only a turd puts their kitties on the net.
>>>
>> Here, I'll share another one. With everything going on in my life
>> lately, my poor Maine Coon's coat got very neglected. I finally had a
>> chance to take him to the groomer and they had to give him a lion cut.
>> He actually seems a lot more happy.
>>
>> http://i59.tinypic.com/4ict2x.jpg
>
> I wish I had known about that cut for Puff the Manx.. In the winter
> she matted up like wool.
> Janet US
>
Winter is the worst! I haven't set up my humidifier and the fuzzies are
all static and that static creates mats. I might keep Sammy cut like
this. He started getting the nick name stinky because poop would get
stuck in his tail and he would scratch me all to hell when I tried to
clean him up. I love the look of Maine Coons but I'd rather have him
comfortable and not stinky.

--
ღ.¸¸.œ«*¨`*œ¶
Cheryl

wrote:
>
> Cheryl wrote:
> >Here, I'll share another one. With everything going on in my life
> >lately, my poor Maine Coon's coat got very neglected. I finally had a
> >chance to take him to the groomer and they had to give him a lion cut.
> >He actually seems a lot more happy.
> >
> >http://i59.tinypic.com/4ict2x.jpg
>
> Cute - but I notice he has his back to you, that indicates what he
> thinks of his new hair do

LOL! That was my first thought too. He's embarrassed to show his face.

The cat:
" Lion cut my ass! She gave me a pansy poodle cut! I will poop on
her pillow for this."

LOL!

On Fri, 09 Jan 2015 21:06:40 -0500, Cheryl >
wrote:

> On 1/7/2015 6:31 PM, wrote:
>
> > She might be misguided as to that pervs motives but her advice to you
> > was excellent, get the page down! If you have pics of her on FB you
> > should also remove them, don't be so damn naive.
>
> For now, facebook is actually stable about limiting who can see what. We
> use Facebook to share family pictures but as has happened in the past, a
> glitch or configuration mistake could make everything public so the
> advice is good to be careful about what you post on faceboook.

There's a place where you can reset everything as a batch, but you
lose your custom settings - so you have to go back and relimit certain
images if that's what you really want. For me, I don't want to
photobomb all of my FB friends when I think only certain people will
be interested when I post them. If the settings are changed later,
just the people who are snooping around my wall will see them and it's
obvious they're interested or else they wouldn't be looking - so snoop
away.

--
A kitchen without a cook is just a room