Boardwalk Apartments/Talk

InfoInfo ArticleArticle
Search:    
Differences:

version 92 (2012-02-01 17:10:36 by sritern)
←previous edit
version 93 (2012-02-01 17:23:54 by TomGarberson)
next edit→
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 105: Line 105:

*My whole point of this was to simply see Davis Wiki's philosophy regarding businesses and this is being taken WAY OUT OF CONTEXT, lol, so I'm simply leaving this site and allowing you guys to have fun doing whatever it is you do/please ban me in fact since I respectfully don't know how to delete an account on here.
 Just to make sure you understand what the rest of us are seeing: You're [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments/Talk?action=diff&version2=88&version1=87 now giving us your personal assurance] that 24 hour notices are given (subsequently [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments/Talk?action=diff&version2=89&version1=88 deleted]). Yet you're the same user who [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments?action=diff&version2=18&version1=17 deleted negative comments], [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments?action=diff&version2=19&version1=18 changed dates on positive comments], and then informed us of the [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments?action=diff&version2=20&version1=19 change in management] - from Ali to an expired corporation owned by Ali and not employing anyone else. In doing so, you [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments?action=info&offset=1 claimed (see edit comment for #56) that it was "new management"], and you asserted that the expired corporation was a "partnership corporation" (see edit comment for #63).
 Setting aside the fact that a "partnership corporation" isn't a legal entity (and there's no Limited Liability Partnership under that name), and the fact that the corporation in question had expired in 2006, Mr. Ghorbanzadeh appears to have certified to the CSLB (I'm guessing under penalty of perjury) that there were no employees, in order to avoid having to pay for workers comp insurance. Now, business law and WC aren't within my area of practice, so I'm not sure what sort of penalties would be involved if he were lying about that, or if he were running the company after the corporation expired and the bond were cancelled, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be trivial. Either way, it appears that either you were incorrect (either misinformed or lying) about the business, or Mr. Ghorbanzadeh lied to the state in order to avoid paying WC insurance. At best, it doesn't look great for your degree of certainty as whether the company has observed of the notice of entry requirement, and at worst it could mean you're lying to us and/or the company is perjuring itself to avoid paying into the WC system.
 Moreover, you've implied that your only role in connection with the company is [http://daviswiki.org/Boardwalk_Apartments/Talk?action=diff&version2=76&version1=75 helping with leasing]. If that's it, how do you know whether notice is being given? If you're involved with the day-to-day enough to know on a personal level whether notices are being given, that seems to suggest you've been deceptive throughout this conversation about your role in the company. In either event, it again undermines your credibility in asserting that notice is always given.
 I just want to make sure you understand where people are coming from as they express (as I'm guessing they will) their inclination to believe the four people who have complained about unnoticed and unauthorized entries over your assurance here. --["Users/TomGarberson"]

This page is for discussing the contents of Boardwalk Apartments.

There appear to be some issues regarding this page. This is the place to discuss them!

Summary: sritern and MichaelMikey have great certainty that the comments here are without merit and just chop shop talk. How is Davis Wiki allowed to operate? The page has been restored. [WWW]This comment was left for sritern explaining why the page is being restored. Sritern un-bolded the problem comment on the page, and that was reverted as well, with [WWW]this explanation to Sritern. ... "And that's what happened on Glee!"

Comment copied here from TomGarberson's user page:
2012-02-01 10:45:32   appreciate it as well looking into that user "sbyun" with jabberwocky's direction/I believe it's safe to assume that Davis Wiki/Wiki Spot is here for positive reasons to give the REAL picture of Davis correct? —MichaelMikey

Great, I'm all for providing a great information site on Davis, but there should be guidelines don't you think Tom as there are biases for things left?..For example I can simply say "Tom Garberson, you're such an evil person, why did you steal mary's purse and beat her 7-year old grandkid? Moreover, Tom is a fan of Jerry Sandusky which brings doubts as well..That was such an awful thing, how can you live with yourself?...Now, of course, this is utter non-sense and just bogus and doesn't even make sense, but when people search they'll see "Tom Garberson associated with beating a grandma, kid, and sandusky" and majority of people just draw a conclusion that Tom is a person not associating with, when he in fact can't even defend himself as they'll already have their judgement in place?

Make sense? —MichaelMikey

I agree. For starters, this chat room style is not too credible. Tom Garberson can very well be unfairly associated with things that are incorrect. I'm sorry to say, but that is a fact. We go on trust just cause it is on the internet. That said, user: sbyun has comments every year from years 2007-2010. In fact, this user started the page and has only written personal and negative things. It is a personal hate page towards ali and michelle. Not sure who this is and this is clearly personal vendetta and harassment. Here is the userinfo: [WWW]http://daviswiki.org/Users/sbyun?action=userinfo. You can archive if you want to have on file for legal threats should more of this continue. I am not Ali or Michelle.
sritern

It seems that businesses talk themselves into more problems than they talk themselves out of. -MikeyCrews

I don't agree with those userss comments addressing you Tom or anybody personally for that matter and was more addressing my issue how these msgs. boards foster these kind of bogus discussions and causes you to now have to even justify with a response since there are no guidelines to this site on cutting out bogus comments...Not trying to bully at all since again from what I see on your page you're a great family man, accomplished individual and upstanding citizen, but so are many other people that this site just serves as a spring board for hateful comments like what we're doing exactly on this conversation huh?

Oh sure WilliamLewis, I just read your question now..sbyun is making a claim that landlord breaks tenant right of having at least 24 hours notice and "he frequently checks in on the apartments and will appear when you least expect it." that's utterly false and just bogus, just like the claims to Tom here, but why is that still up there/have to be justified with a response like Tom has to be here or you in fact what about the posting that reads now that

[defamatory comment removed]
MichaelMikey

* Not true WilliamLewis, just looking to get my original Q answered why this site allows/encourages hateful/personal attacks and not even properly notify the person targeted such as Tom Gaberson in this case above? Moreover, how does one go about putting a defamatory comment, etc. as this site is rather hard to use? I don't expect to get this answered as just going in circles, good day. —MichaelMikey

At PeterBoulay, this is my original statement exactly, lol, and thank you for elucidating my point where garbage is just spewed here..

In sum, please delete my comments about Tom and anything else hurtful, I'm honestly glad William you deleted that previous comment since I'm a person who promotes peace and respectful dialogue. Again, my relation to these people have no bearing on my argument where I very well can just be a concerned citizen who don't appreciate people having hurtful things said about them..Moreover, I don't like Tom, who again I've never met, being targeted and associated with bad things, and so instead of having him even have to defend his comment, think it should just be removed, but only if these comments about ali/michelle are and many other comments I've seen on this site...is that so much to ask for simple fairness? why should Tom or you William have their name protected, but the innocent person who doesn't know how to operate this site have to suffer? —MichaelMikey


What I think you're missing is that it's longstanding practice on this wiki that, so long as the comments are not personal attacks (and these are not) or contain demonstrable falsehoods (and no one has shown that the claims are false), the comments stay. That way, pages for businesses reflect many different viewpoints about the business, both good and bad. Business owners are encouraged to respond in ways that show their professionalism and customer service — a good response can completely turn around a complaint like that, turning a negative into a positive. In short, you're fighting longstanding wiki practice that has good reasons for being the way that it is, and expecting the rules to be changed for this one case. That is not likely to happen. —CovertProfessor

Hello?

[defamatory comment removed—stop posting material like that]


I am still waiting to hear which of the comments on the Boardwalk Apartments page are personal attacks that are in any way similar to the attacks on editors that have been made on this Talk page. —CovertProfessor

— Correct CovertProfessor. I know for a fact that 24 hour notices to units per the law are always followed. If one of the tenants does not get the notice sent to the unit that is an internal issue between tenants.
sritern



I'm starting to consider the possibility that Michaelmikey (no relation to myself) could be a bitter former tenant who is on a quest to make the management of the Boardwalk seem as incompetent and unscrupulous as possible. Why would someone wanting to improve the image of a business engage in name calling and page deletions that make that business seem like a bunch of scandalous dirt-bags. I think very few people could read MichaelMikey's comments and think "oh yea, that guy seems reasonable, I want to live there.". At this point, I'd probably rather live at the the Primate Center. —[Users/MikeyCrews"]


I'm willing to believe the comments made by "tenants" ["Daubert]


The exercise of putting "feces" here was to really see what wiki is about. Can people really claim whatever and then those people have to come back and prove innocence. TomGarberson, you are a lawyer and can hopefully respect rights. Appreciate you not taking offense to the exercise. Side note, ever notice how if a tenant shares an experience, which just so may happen to be good, it is called fake. In other words, only the bad apply or are kept. Overtime, one would definitely think something of someone based of some users or friends posting stuff.

To focus on a solution. Have you thought about a system like banks, craigslist, etc where a phone number is required to be registered to avoid spamming or same person multiple posting accounts? I get the IP thing, but seriously not that effective. We are still talking about stuff from years ago.

Ever since I called out "user/sbyun" a new similar user "user/zombiek" has emerged. Just realized that tenant "user/HoldenCaulfield" identified "user/zombiek" S*** B*******'s mail which would match "user/sbyun" Case in point. Same user, different names, community thinks it has credibility. Circular loop. What can be done?

sritern

This is a Wiki Spot wiki. Wiki Spot is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that helps communities collaborate via wikis.