Lebanon Rumors

Been hearing a few interesting things today....

For example, that the account given by LT as to how the newspaper knew about the complaint filed with the district? I've been told that's false - though since I've also been told it's true, both claims having been made by trustworthy sources, I'm withholding judgment.

Next, I've heard that there is more to the complaint filed with the district than the Lebanon Express story lets on. While the Express story relates Fandiño's claims of libelous statements being made on the LT blog (an issue that I have no stance on at the moment) and notes how that has been passed to the school board, I have been told that there was element to the complaint that referenced the LCSD's cyberbullying policy - basically, a claim that the writing of LT consitutes cyberbullying by existing district standards. I find that really interesting, since a) I had always assumed cyberbullying was done mostly by students (a terrible assumption, to be sure) and b), because I'm not at all sure if I think the statements made on the LT blog constitute cyberbullying. I just don't know much about it at this point. Furthermore, since this is a relatively new issue nationally, I'm sure it's relatively new to the district, which suggests that district policies that exist surrounding it have yet to really be tested... and I don't really want to see Josh and Rick doing the testing.

But the point is this: Nowhere in the Express story is the cyberbullying angle noted. Furthermore, that part of the complaint - if my information is true - is squarely directed at existing school district policy, which suggests that perhaps it should be dealt with in the Superintendent's Office or at least in the District Office and not at a School Board meeting. I wonder if all parts of the complaint have been passed to the board, or just the part dealing with Fandiño's claims of libel? If not, is Robinson dealing with the cyberbullying stuff? Should he be? Is it his place, or the board's place?

In any case, I also want to take this chance to ask a few more questions about the idea that blogger LT needs to be outed.

Fandiño has said that she wants the attacks to stop. Regardless of one's stance on whether or not what LT writes are 'attacks', let's take Kim's claim at face value.

Well, let's back up a step before that, even. What are the desirable outcomes to the filing of the complaint? (Obviously, different people are going to desire different outcomes.) What are the potential outcomes?

We know Fandiño's stated outcome; it was in the newspaper. Is that the same as her desired outcome? I suspect - but have no proof for - that Fandiño wants LT outed because Fandiño thinks LT is a teacher, and outing her will both end her blogging and let Fandiño exert some pressure on her.

Here's why I say this: If Fandiño wants the attacks to stop, is it possible to do so without outing LT? I think it is, depending on how the complaint is handled and who says what to whom. I value free speech fairly highly, and I think anonymous free speech is, for me at least (and my opinion may not be in line with legal interpretations), included in that category. Therefore, my desired outcome will leave the anonymity of LT intact (since their power to speak as they see fit partially derives from their anonymity). So, in my mind, if Fandiño and LT could find some common ground when it comes to what constitutes an attack and what constitutes libel - if they could talk, and I've not heard an account of them doing so (correct me if I'm wrong) - then maybe the complaint and the whole process could be avoided, and instead two folks who don't seem to get along could maybe start building a relationship based on communication and trust, even though they both know they disagree on many issues.

For me, it comes back to process and honest communication.