LaVonne, where art thou?

"LaVonne Carlson" wrote in message
...


Byron Canfield wrote:

"Doan" wrote in message
...

Going to week number 15!

Doan


Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill
filter.
Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies
to
your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so
appropriate.

I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him
to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate.
His
diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and
letting
doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.

LaVonne

Cleaning rusty used nails would be a better use of your time.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:



Byron Canfield wrote:

"Doan" wrote in message
...

Going to week number 15!

Doan


Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.

I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.

This is very funny. :-) This is the same LaVonne that said she has who
challenged to me to debate her not long ago. This is also the same
LaVonne who said she has responded to my weeks a few weeks ago. This is
the same LaVonne who lied about me havingg children taken away by CPS!
What next, LaVonne? ;-)

Doan

Doan wrote in message ...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:



Byron Canfield wrote:

"Doan" wrote in message
...

Going to week number 15!

Doan


Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.

I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.

This is very funny. :-) This is the same LaVonne that said she has who
challenged to me to debate her not long ago. This is also the same
LaVonne who said she has responded to my weeks a few weeks ago. This is
the same LaVonne who lied about me havingg children taken away by CPS!
What next, LaVonne? ;-)

Doan

Look at the puppy with his own **** on his nose. Isn't that cute...r r r r

Stoneman

On 15 Oct 2003, Kane wrote:

Doan wrote in message ...
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:



Byron Canfield wrote:

"Doan" wrote in message
...

Going to week number 15!

Doan


Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill filter.
Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies to
your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so appropriate.

I've responded to doan for more years than I care to remember. He's been
around alt.parenting.spanking for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any more. There is little
point. He appears incapable of engaging in rational discussion or debate. His
diatribes are counter-productive and time consuming. Ignoring doan and letting
doan talk to doan seems a much better use of my time.

This is very funny. :-) This is the same LaVonne that said she has who
challenged to me to debate her not long ago. This is also the same
LaVonne who said she has responded to my weeks a few weeks ago. This is
the same LaVonne who lied about me havingg children taken away by CPS!
What next, LaVonne? ;-)

Doan

Look at the puppy with his own **** on his nose. Isn't that cute...r r r r

Stoneman

LOL! A typical response from another "never-spanked" boy! What is this
fascination you and Steve have with "sh*t"? ;-)

Doan

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Byron Canfield wrote:

"Doan" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Byron Canfield wrote:

"Doan" wrote in message
...

Going to week number 15!

Doan


Perhaps she grew weary of your diatribe and added you to her kill
filter.
Hmm, might have to do that myself. The you can continue to post replies
to
your own messages, talking to yourself -- somehow that seems so
appropriate.

Yup! That seems to be the best that the anti-spanking zealotS can do! :-)
I gave them chances after chances to defend their position and their
precious "pee-reviewed" studies and all they can do is run and hide. It
must be fun running around with no clothes on. Maybe if they cover their
eyes and ears, they can pretend they are the Emperor and dictate to others
how to parent! :-)

Doan

No, you flatter yourself; they just grow bored with you.

I don't! I don't claim to have a Ph.D., teach math at a college level,
a member of MESA.... ;-) I am just a little boy who pointed out that
the anti-spanking emperor has no clothes! And, in some cases, he didn't
even have a penis! :-)

Doan

It is now 16 weeks!

Doan

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Doan wrote:


Going to week number 15!

Doan

On Sun, 5 Oct 2003, Doan wrote:

Make that 14 weeks. :-)

Doan

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

It is now 13 weeks!

Doan

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:


I guess the truth is there is NO post. It is now going 12 weeks!

Doan

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

Can anyone else find the post? Is there more than one LaVonne? ;-)

Doan

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

Still can't find the post where I responded?

Oops.

LaVonne

Doan wrote:

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Doan wrote:

On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Ron wrote:


"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:


On Thu, 21 Aug 2003, Doan wrote:



It has been over seven weeks now since LaVonne posted "studies that
have
not been discussed in this newsgroup". I challenged her to debate me
on these so-called studies. Why is she so afraid to take me on?

Doan

It is now over eight weeks. Still nothing but empty accusations from
LaVonne. Why is she still avoiding me?

Doan

Have anyone seen LaVonne lately? ;-)

Doan

She cross-posted something to aspcs in the last 2 hours, thinking that it
was more appropriate there. Kinda hard to tell what she was thinking.

Ron

IOW, she plays the "hide-low until they forget" game. :-)

Doan

It's now over nine weeks!

Doan

It's now over TEN weeks! Is the anti-spanking position so weak that it
cannot be defended - even by self-proclaimed Ph.D. like LaVonne?

Doan

It's now going 11 weeks! Do you have a feeling that LaVonne wanted to
debate??? ;-)

Doan

LaVonne wrote
I've responded to doan for more years than I care to
remember. He's been around alt.parenting.spanking
for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any
more. There is little point. He appears incapable
of engaging in rational discussion or debate.

If those are your standards, have you killfiled yourself?

Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.

The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
posted instantaneously.

Doan sometimes shows some language trouble, but
seems to hold salient facts in his head much more
effectively than you do.

You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.

Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
as rational or scientific discourse.

Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.

Come on out and debate Doan.

a123sdg321

On 24 Oct 2003, Greg Hanson wrote:

LaVonne wrote
I've responded to doan for more years than I care to
remember. He's been around alt.parenting.spanking
for a very long time. I haven't added him to my
kill filter but I seldom respond to his posts any
more. There is little point. He appears incapable
of engaging in rational discussion or debate.

If those are your standards, have you killfiled yourself?

Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.

The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
posted instantaneously.

Doan sometimes shows some language trouble, but
seems to hold salient facts in his head much more
effectively than you do.

You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.

Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
as rational or scientific discourse.

Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.

Come on out and debate Doan.

She CANNOT debate with me on scientific ground because she
knows deep down that none of her studies can stand up to
scientific scrutiny. She only pretended that she wanted
to debate and when she knows that she is about to lose
the debate, she ran! Just take at her post on Aug. 25, 03:

"Like you, Steve, I have major doubts that Doan has read the studies he's
debated, but he may have. I don't know. He just challenged me on a
Straus et.al study. I asked him to post a reference and his evidence for
his claim. Let's see what he can do!"
LaVonne

When I pressed her on it, she ran! She knows she can't win because even
the authors of the study, Straus et al. had to capitulate:

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently."

and

"Straus, for example, has made explicit the fact that his research is
motivated by secular humanism. This includes a deeply held belief that
good ends should not be sought by bad means; that all forms of interpersonal
violence, including spanking, are wrong, even when motivated by love and
concern; and that we therefore need to develop nonviolent methods of
preventing and correcting antisocial behavior. These deeply held values may
account for the failure of Straus to perceive the serious limitation of
measuring CP using a 1-week reference period."
(ARCHIVES, In Reply. March 1998)

Doan

Greg Hanson wrote (to me):


Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.

I've provided scientific data, Greg. Over the years I have provided
references to many studies spanning several decades, none of which show
spanking to be more effective in the long term than alternative
disciplinary strategies. Many do not show spanking preferable to
alternative strategies, even short term. In the research, spanking
consistently correlates positively with long-term negative outcomes.
Both child development research and research on parental discipline
practices clearly identifies strategies which are most likely to help
children learn, grow and develop and that do not carry the risks
associated with spanking. You could do some research, Greg, if previous
ng posts are not archived. If you would like me to once again begin
posting references, please indicate. This is very time consuming if you
are not going to take the time to look up the studies and read the
scientific data.

And yes, I continue to make an emotional plea for the protection of
children. I make no apologies for emotional pleas to provide children
the parenting they deserve, and the protection from physical assault
that every adult in this society enjoys.

The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
posted instantaneously.

You post no proof for your claims, Greg. You post anecdotes and
propaganda. Show me scientific data.

You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.

The "Sweden stuff" as you call it, was not disproven, Greg. Until you
can define "Sweden stuff" and provide research evidence that the "Sweden
stuff" has been completely disproven I will continue to refer to studies
which have shown the effectiveness on many levels of Sweden's legal ban
on spanking children.

Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
as rational or scientific discourse.

No, they are not. I have a personal opinion about the ethics
surrounding the practice of legal assaulting children in the name of
discipline. I have a wealth of peer-reviewed, published research
studies that not only fail to identify any benefit to spanking over
alternative, positive parenting strategies, but that consistently and
positively correlate spanking with potential long-term harm.

You do seem to be quite emotional about this whole CPS issue, and have
yet to provide a reference to a peer-reviewed and published research
study that supports your many opinions which you state as fact.
Projection is an interesting thing, isn't it?

Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.

I don't hide from doan. I have spent many years debating doan before
you were involved in alt.parenting.spanking. I have listened to doan's
abuse and doan's consistent distortion. I now choose to spend my time
more wisely. You are a relative newcomer to alt.parenting.spanking.
I've been on this ng since the mid 1990's. If you do not know the
history, be careful with your challenges.

LaVonne



Come on out and debate Doan.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, LaVonne Carlson wrote:

Greg Hanson wrote (to me):


Your idea of a rational discussion is an emotional plea
devoid of any scientific data or grounded facts.

I've provided scientific data, Greg. Over the years I have provided
references to many studies spanning several decades, none of which show
spanking to be more effective in the long term than alternative
disciplinary strategies.

Then show us one study in which your non-cp alternatives are any better.
Let me remind you, and others who are interested, that in Straus &
Mouradian (1998), the CORRELATION between ASB and non-cp alternatives
are even stronger than spanking. You and Chris have been running
from debating since I brought this up. Why is that?

Many do not show spanking preferable to
alternative strategies, even short term. In the research, spanking
consistently correlates positively with long-term negative outcomes.
Both child development research and research on parental discipline
practices clearly identifies strategies which are most likely to help
children learn, grow and develop and that do not carry the risks
associated with spanking. You could do some research, Greg, if previous
ng posts are not archived. If you would like me to once again begin
posting references, please indicate. This is very time consuming if you
are not going to take the time to look up the studies and read the
scientific data.

Then, this is your chance to defend those "scientific data", LaVonne.
For example, in Straus et al. (1997), how is it that the children who
were spanked less than once a week showed a DECREASE in ASB from t1 to
t2? Isn't that a BENEFIT? Why did Straus want to pass this group (56% of
the sample) as a "NON-SPANKED" group? When Dr. Larzelere pointed this
out to him, he had to capitulate:

"We are indebted to Larzelere et al for alerting us to the likelihood that our
no-spanking group includes occasional spankers. To the extent that this is
the case, the decrease in antisocial behavior that we found for children in
the "none" group may indicate an improvement in the behavior of children whose
parents spank, but do so only infrequently. Although that is a plausible
interpretation, data from another study enable us to investigate
this issue by classifying spanking as "never" or "not in the past 6 months,"
or the frequency of corporal punishment (CP) in the previous 6 months.[1] "

[1] -This is the Straus & Mouradian (1998) study, which we now know
that the correlation between non-cp and ASB is even stronger for non-cp!

And yes, I continue to make an emotional plea for the protection of
children. I make no apologies for emotional pleas to provide children
the parenting they deserve, and the protection from physical assault
that every adult in this society enjoys.

And that is where your problem lies! LOTS of EMOTION but NO LOGIC!
Do you know that the police still carry BATONS??? ;-)

The CPS of every state in the us FAILED Federal audits
and as big a deal as that was, you remained ignorant
of this huge important fact, as show by your recent
self serving disbelief and demand for proof, which I
posted instantaneously.

You post no proof for your claims, Greg. You post anecdotes and
propaganda. Show me scientific data.

If you pull your head out of the anti-spanking sand, perhaps you
will see it! ;-)

You saw the Sweden stuff get completely disproven,
and true to bureaucratic form you continued to
refer to it, reflexively, without naming the country.

The "Sweden stuff" as you call it, was not disproven, Greg. Until you
can define "Sweden stuff" and provide research evidence that the "Sweden
stuff" has been completely disproven I will continue to refer to studies
which have shown the effectiveness on many levels of Sweden's legal ban
on spanking children.

LOL! Shall I post the study by Dr. Larzelere again, LaVonne?

Emotional pleas and personal opinion are not the same
as rational or scientific discourse.

No, they are not. I have a personal opinion about the ethics
surrounding the practice of legal assaulting children in the name of
discipline. I have a wealth of peer-reviewed, published research
studies that not only fail to identify any benefit to spanking over
alternative, positive parenting strategies, but that consistently and
positively correlate spanking with potential long-term harm.

If this is true, it is easy to show that your non-cp are better under the
same condition. I have challenged you for years on this. All you can
do so far is run, hide and lies about me, LaVonne. Why is that?

You do seem to be quite emotional about this whole CPS issue, and have
yet to provide a reference to a peer-reviewed and published research
study that supports your many opinions which you state as fact.
Projection is an interesting thing, isn't it?

Hiding out from Doan does NOT prove you to be superior.
No matter how much you unscientifically WISH it would.

I don't hide from doan. I have spent many years debating doan before
you were involved in alt.parenting.spanking. I have listened to doan's
abuse and doan's consistent distortion. I now choose to spend my time
more wisely. You are a relative newcomer to alt.parenting.spanking.
I've been on this ng since the mid 1990's. If you do not know the
history, be careful with your challenges.

More accusation against me, LaVonne? It's time for you to prove it!
Come on, LaVonne. Put up or shut up!

Doan

LaVonne



Come on out and debate Doan.