APS - School Shifts in the Fall?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

FOIAs:
- APE guy
- unknown
- SR guy (got the copy already created for unknown)
- APE guy asked APS who requested FOIA (may not have been official FOIA)

No, you screwed it up. JB. Add the original FOIA request for Kadera’s emails. BE FOIA’d JB’s FOIA request. JB then FOIA’d all FOIA requests for his original FOIA request, which turned up only a single request - BE’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting to see the Smart Restart people completely losing their minds today.

please show me where.. i could use some entertainment tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

Foia'ing the emails of a candidate for public office seems fair to me. The rest of that shit is just crazy.

Sadly this is standard operating procedure for some Arlington parents. Back when the original ASFS/Key swap war was raging parents were FOIAing other parents emails to the board and then confronting their neighbors about their opinions. It's both hilarious and sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

Foia'ing the emails of a candidate for public office seems fair to me. The rest of that shit is just crazy.

Fair, but isn’t it also a little crazy? Did he FOIA all the candidates or just the one? And what about his connection to APE - was he using the FOIA’d info to inform his own voting decision or something more? All of this seems nuts....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting to see the Smart Restart people completely losing their minds today.

please show me where.. i could use some entertainment tonight.

Unfortunately I can’t. It was all here, but most of them have been removed because they were basically just profanity, insults and degrading comments directed toward APE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great. I don't have to put in more work, because that Twitter account did it for me. Not a smart look to come back to harass more APE members.

Look at the followers list. Most, if not all SR members. 'Nuff said.

I can't find it

Agree, I'm not on twitter, so I can't see who follows and who the account is following. It's obviously an account made by BE, however, and I find it hysterical he turned it back on and is pretending it's not him because someone screen-shoted it.

This makes no sense. He was obviously fine sharing it under his own name on AEM so why would he put it under an anon account?
Whoever the twitter person is wants to be anonymous.

+1

Surreee. I’m sure he wasn’t thinking oh I can make it look like it’s someone else! And then FOIA cubed happen and we all know there was only one FOIA of the FOIA (still confused why the original one was a big deal but okay). So then today he thought I’ll make it seem like it’s someone at APS... heheh evil laugh oh crap that didn’t work either back to protected. Was enlighten to see the only people who liked this trolls tweet’s. You don’t just stumble upon someone’s feed on Twitter - that’s not how it works.

No. We don’t know that at all.

You are mental.

Per APS, there was only one FOIA request. The apeshit Twitter account doesn’t even claim otherwise, they’re claiming they got the screen shot from a non-FOIA source within APS.

Per APS? Where is THAT screenshot? We only heard that from a THIRDhand source.

If you doubt the source, it would be very easy for you to prove them wrong by submitting an identical FOIA request and then posting the results. Unless and until you do, I will believe the person who did submit a request.

And who exactly was that? Did that person ever post? Share a screenshot or email text? No. Some other random person shared some recap. Could be total BS.

The SR FOIA guy shared the email text.

The person who made the original FOIA request is not on AEM, and asked a friend to post a response he wrote himself. Again, if you doubt his statement, you can easily disprove it with minimal effort. But I doubt you’ll do that, because you know it will confirm what the statement said about there only being one FOIA request.

I’m not doing it only because I value my privacy. Otherwise I’d be requesting left and right for fun. Why don’t you request it since you are so convinced?

I trust the person who actually shared the email (although screenshot would be better). Not some third-hand source.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to the moderator, no they will not be quiet.. we've been quiet wayyy too long.. Too bad if you don't like the clapping and support!!!

"Quiet?" ROFL! All they've done is whine endlessly, b*tch incessantly, scream and stomp their feet all year long.

I hope if they refuse to abide by the rules of decorum, they kick them out on their ears.

parents are fed up and are not allowed to have dialogue at the meetings. The very least we can do is to clap in show of support for one another.. the SB silences support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s interesting to see the Smart Restart people completely losing their minds today.

please show me where.. i could use some entertainment tonight.

Unfortunately I can’t. It was all here, but most of them have been removed because they were basically just profanity, insults and degrading comments directed toward APE.

And none of those were a “Start Restart” person.

Are you the same moron who confused me with someone posting on AEM?

Many people dislike APE. Not sure why it’s so hard for you to believe that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great. I don't have to put in more work, because that Twitter account did it for me. Not a smart look to come back to harass more APE members.

Look at the followers list. Most, if not all SR members. 'Nuff said.

I can't find it

Agree, I'm not on twitter, so I can't see who follows and who the account is following. It's obviously an account made by BE, however, and I find it hysterical he turned it back on and is pretending it's not him because someone screen-shoted it.

This makes no sense. He was obviously fine sharing it under his own name on AEM so why would he put it under an anon account?
Whoever the twitter person is wants to be anonymous.

+1

Surreee. I’m sure he wasn’t thinking oh I can make it look like it’s someone else! And then FOIA cubed happen and we all know there was only one FOIA of the FOIA (still confused why the original one was a big deal but okay). So then today he thought I’ll make it seem like it’s someone at APS... heheh evil laugh oh crap that didn’t work either back to protected. Was enlighten to see the only people who liked this trolls tweet’s. You don’t just stumble upon someone’s feed on Twitter - that’s not how it works.

No. We don’t know that at all.

You are mental.

Per APS, there was only one FOIA request. The apeshit Twitter account doesn’t even claim otherwise, they’re claiming they got the screen shot from a non-FOIA source within APS.

Per APS? Where is THAT screenshot? We only heard that from a THIRDhand source.

If you doubt the source, it would be very easy for you to prove them wrong by submitting an identical FOIA request and then posting the results. Unless and until you do, I will believe the person who did submit a request.

And who exactly was that? Did that person ever post? Share a screenshot or email text? No. Some other random person shared some recap. Could be total BS.

The SR FOIA guy shared the email text.

The person who made the original FOIA request is not on AEM, and asked a friend to post a response he wrote himself. Again, if you doubt his statement, you can easily disprove it with minimal effort. But I doubt you’ll do that, because you know it will confirm what the statement said about there only being one FOIA request.

I’m not doing it only because I value my privacy. Otherwise I’d be requesting left and right for fun. Why don’t you request it since you are so convinced?

I trust the person who actually shared the email (although screenshot would be better). Not some third-hand source.

LOL, I have no need to FOIA anything because I believe the posted statement about the FOIA results. Also, the email you are referring to wasn’t a screen shot, it was a copy and paste with certain text removed. Further, nothing SR guy posted to defend himself contradicts the statement from the other guy.

You just don’t like how it played out so you’re trying to invent alternative facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

FOIAs:
- APE guy
- unknown
- SR guy (got the copy already created for unknown)
- APE guy asked APS who requested FOIA (may not have been official FOIA)

No, you screwed it up. JB. Add the original FOIA request for Kadera’s emails. BE FOIA’d JB’s FOIA request. JB then FOIA’d all FOIA requests for his original FOIA request, which turned up only a single request - BE’s.

I can’t remember their names/initials. I listed the people who requested the FOIAs so “APE guy” on my list is the guy who requested MK email messages. Etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

FOIAs:
- APE guy
- unknown
- SR guy (got the copy already created for unknown)
- APE guy asked APS who requested FOIA (may not have been official FOIA)

SR guy/BE admitted he requested the FOIA of the FOIA. He could have just passed on that email to the owner of the Twitter handle. Hence the "sources." And then conveniently, BG shared the link, maybe thinking it couldn't be traced back to him. Until FOIAx3 was threatened. No getting out of it now. Also can explains how there's only one FOIA, as claimed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:to the moderator, no they will not be quiet.. we've been quiet wayyy too long.. Too bad if you don't like the clapping and support!!!

"Quiet?" ROFL! All they've done is whine endlessly, b*tch incessantly, scream and stomp their feet all year long.

I hope if they refuse to abide by the rules of decorum, they kick them out on their ears.

parents are fed up and are not allowed to have dialogue at the meetings. The very least we can do is to clap in show of support for one another.. the SB silences support.

This is a consistent policy that always applies at school board meetings. Of course there are always entitled brats who think the rules don't apply to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

FOIAs:
- APE guy
- unknown
- SR guy (got the copy already created for unknown)
- APE guy asked APS who requested FOIA (may not have been official FOIA)

No, you screwed it up. JB. Add the original FOIA request for Kadera’s emails. BE FOIA’d JB’s FOIA request. JB then FOIA’d all FOIA requests for his original FOIA request, which turned up only a single request - BE’s.

No - this hasn’t been proven yet. And it didn’t sound like it was an official FOIA anyway.

JB is welcome to share the screenshot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

FOIAs:
- APE guy
- unknown
- SR guy (got the copy already created for unknown)
- APE guy asked APS who requested FOIA (may not have been official FOIA)

No, you screwed it up. JB. Add the original FOIA request for Kadera’s emails. BE FOIA’d JB’s FOIA request. JB then FOIA’d all FOIA requests for his original FOIA request, which turned up only a single request - BE’s.

I can’t remember their names/initials. I listed the people who requested the FOIAs so “APE guy” on my list is the guy who requested MK email messages. Etc.

There is no “unknown.” The identities of all of the FOIA requesters have been made public. To use your terms, “SR guy” didn’t get a copy of something already made for “unknown,” “SR guy” was the only person to make a FOIA request for “APE guy’s” original request.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to recap, someone foia'ed MK's emails sent to APS. BE got wind of this and FOIA'ed THAT FOIA. Then someone screenshot the APS email of the original FOIA and posted it. Then the FOIA OF THE FOIA happened, which is how we found out it was BE. So there were three FOIAS.

FOIAs:
- APE guy
- unknown
- SR guy (got the copy already created for unknown)
- APE guy asked APS who requested FOIA (may not have been official FOIA)

No, you screwed it up. JB. Add the original FOIA request for Kadera’s emails. BE FOIA’d JB’s FOIA request. JB then FOIA’d all FOIA requests for his original FOIA request, which turned up only a single request - BE’s.

No - this hasn’t been proven yet. And it didn’t sound like it was an official FOIA anyway.

JB is welcome to share the screenshot.

Isn't that what I just said above?