Dr. Enfield Wants You All to Know She Means It
Dear Readers,
As some of you may know, recently someone posted a comment using Dr. Enfield's name. (The comment was directed at me, though.) It had been posted after I had retired one evening and I found an e-mail the next morning from Lesley Rodgers in Communications asking me about it. Then, there was one from Dr. Enfield that said:
I expect the comment to be removed today.
I replied that I had seen it and removed it. I apologized and said that sometimes people can be unpleasant. I then wrote a separate thread reminding readers to NEVER pretend to be a living person/figure.
She wrote back:
Thank you Melissa. I suggest you remind your readers that posts such as these can result in legal action.
So then for some reason, Blogger didn't immediately scrub the name (even though the post was gone) and I heard back from Dr. Enfield.
Melissa, please post that I did not make any comment on your blog. Apparently my name is still listed. I want it removed immediately and/or have you post that I never made any comments.
I then wrote that I would try to get it down and also added this:
I will point out that this is a free forum as well as a country with First Amendment rights. I am being clear in my words to my readers about what they can and cannot do so it is somewhat beyond my power to stop every post. I can clear comments and again,I will look into how to get rid of a name attached to a post.
I guessed that had cleared it up. I guessed wrong.
So at last night's Board meeting half-time, I was chatting with Lesley and Dr. Enfield came up to me with a smile. I was surprised as she has generally been freezing me out since she announced she was not staying with the district. She thanked me for taking down the post and again I said I was sorry. But then, with a big smile, she said that my readers and I should know that if it ever happens again, she'll seek legal action.
Then she walked away before I could reply.
And so I first wanted to put forth what she has stated because she clearly wants all of you to know that she will have her legal counsel find you and sue you if you use her name. As well, she also wants Charlie and me to know this. (I assume since Google owns Blogger, them as well. I would think that Google has its own crew of lawyers.)
I can understand that as a public figure she does not want people to use her name to make comments. It is wrong. But I will also plainly state that I did not appreciate Dr. Enfield ordering me around like I was an employee.
I have done research on this issue and although there is one case in Kentucky that went against the blogger, most cases stand with the First Amendment. The case in Kentucky was about the blogger libeling a public figure. Since I didn't post the comment in question that would not fit this case.
But since she did want you to know that she will find you and start legal action against you if you use her name, I thought I would make that clear.
So now you have been informed and my duty is discharged (again).
As some of you may know, recently someone posted a comment using Dr. Enfield's name. (The comment was directed at me, though.) It had been posted after I had retired one evening and I found an e-mail the next morning from Lesley Rodgers in Communications asking me about it. Then, there was one from Dr. Enfield that said:
I expect the comment to be removed today.
I replied that I had seen it and removed it. I apologized and said that sometimes people can be unpleasant. I then wrote a separate thread reminding readers to NEVER pretend to be a living person/figure.
She wrote back:
Thank you Melissa. I suggest you remind your readers that posts such as these can result in legal action.
So then for some reason, Blogger didn't immediately scrub the name (even though the post was gone) and I heard back from Dr. Enfield.
Melissa, please post that I did not make any comment on your blog. Apparently my name is still listed. I want it removed immediately and/or have you post that I never made any comments.
I then wrote that I would try to get it down and also added this:
I will point out that this is a free forum as well as a country with First Amendment rights. I am being clear in my words to my readers about what they can and cannot do so it is somewhat beyond my power to stop every post. I can clear comments and again,I will look into how to get rid of a name attached to a post.
I guessed that had cleared it up. I guessed wrong.
So at last night's Board meeting half-time, I was chatting with Lesley and Dr. Enfield came up to me with a smile. I was surprised as she has generally been freezing me out since she announced she was not staying with the district. She thanked me for taking down the post and again I said I was sorry. But then, with a big smile, she said that my readers and I should know that if it ever happens again, she'll seek legal action.
Then she walked away before I could reply.
And so I first wanted to put forth what she has stated because she clearly wants all of you to know that she will have her legal counsel find you and sue you if you use her name. As well, she also wants Charlie and me to know this. (I assume since Google owns Blogger, them as well. I would think that Google has its own crew of lawyers.)
I can understand that as a public figure she does not want people to use her name to make comments. It is wrong. But I will also plainly state that I did not appreciate Dr. Enfield ordering me around like I was an employee.
I have done research on this issue and although there is one case in Kentucky that went against the blogger, most cases stand with the First Amendment. The case in Kentucky was about the blogger libeling a public figure. Since I didn't post the comment in question that would not fit this case.
But since she did want you to know that she will find you and start legal action against you if you use her name, I thought I would make that clear.
So now you have been informed and my duty is discharged (again).
Comments
That is one fierce ego there - but then - that's seems to be the norm for people of ambition.
I respect one's right to not be dis-respected - but get over yourself. Respectfully ;o)
someone
Mr White
Dr. Enfield seems to have paper thin skin to get so upset about a one-time anonymous post that wasn't even directed at her. And I can confirm what Someone... said above. I used to work for a large search engine company, and am intimately familiar with what can, and cannot, be electronically published. Dr. Enfield's status as a public figure, plus your quick actions, put you in no legal danger.
But wow, Dr. Enfield. Chill out a little. Seriously. And have someone give you a brief tutorial on how such things happen. One post removed quickly is not a tragedy.
Former search geek
that my readers and I should know
that if it ever happens again, she'll seek legal action."
I'd say if anyone actually enjoyed
the act of saying that they should
be getting some professional help.
From "Certainly not S.Enfield and
very happy to not be so".
Anybody up for testing those waters?
--TC
Ms. Enfield had better start snapping up domain names if she's that concerned about her "brand".
Some business out of PA has registered susanenfield.com, but most of the other extensions (.org, .net, etc.) are available.
Then of course you have to snap up susanenfieldsucks.com and all of it's variations if you really want to protect your brand.
Or, you could, maybe just, GET OVER YOURSELF.
Mr. Bruce Taylor made an excellent suggestion that unfortunately deleted or disappeared into the cloud. I applaud you, sir.
Not impressed.
It could be that Enfield is just trying to intimidate Melissa, Charlie, and those who comment on this blog, as a departing shot before she moves on to Highline SD. However, I do wonder if this kind of attack is a precursor to SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) lawsuits, where the powerful attempt to silence dissenters by suing them. That may sound far-fetched, but with the escalation of words from some of the pro-reformers, I think it's possible.
-- Ebenezer
Signed, tempted
Signed, tempted
Whatever the reason, it doesn't reflect well on her.
For real, what would be her cause of action? How would she find out who actually wrote that? I doubt Melissa or blog contributors are legally liable for the comments.
what,evahhhh.
Melissa, did you feel threatened? You could take out a restraining order.... since we're getting all legal and all.
Susan Enfield... here's an idea. Get busy supervising the transportation department and figure out a fix to that cluster(beep) so our kids are hanging out on street corners at 6:30 am waiting for their bus.
getAlife
But Enfield acting like that is Not a way to win friends, and Melissa deleted it as soon as she saw it.
And if it ends up in court, while I think Melissa would eventually win, Enfield would have the budget for a longer and more expensive battle, and discovery might force Melissa to reveal some of the anonymous poster's IDs, which we don't want. Not a battle Melissa or the others here need to fight.
I believe Dr Enfield's husband is a computer professional and a blogger, so he could inform her of the lack of feasibility of finding the miscreant to sue.
I don't think it is a big ego that caused her to threaten a lawyer, but a fragile one.
SD
Interim Superintendent
What A Joke
-Guess I am glad it's almost over
Ed Voter
In the final throes of this failed Goodloe-Johnson/Enfield regime, you've been escorted from a public school building by their reprimanded protegee and promotee SNAPP Principal (why?) Rina Geoghagan apparently for shedding light on her shocking illegal behavior.
This took place in the presence of Principal(?) Geoghagan's immediate superior Executive Director Nancy Coogan, herself an identified participant in the investigated chain of wrongdoing, who now unethically fails to disqualify herself from any further supervisory role over unrepentant Principal(?) Geoghagan in this matter despite clear confict of interest.
And now you are being threatened with "legal action" by the same haughty jumped-up Superintendant who promoted Assistant Principal Geoghagan in the midst of the very child endangerment investigation which ultimately revealed that disgraceful King/Geoghagan wrongdoing!
Heck, Melissa, you must be doing something right . . .
Frankly, even if you can tell people to do things, it's usually a good idea to ask them instead. It's a courtesy thing.
I'm always amused by people who threaten legal action when nothing actionable has occurred. It is a form of bullying, and it's also stupid. Any thoughtful or intelligent person - really anyone who isn't sent into a panic by the threat isn't scared by it at all. What action could Dr. Enfield take in Court? None. Sue for what? To protect her use of her name? She has no such right. Of course, it's no surprise when dumb and mean go together.
I think this episode reveals a bit of the monster behind the veneer. It isn't attractive.
Highline has a lot of kids on Free and Reduced Lunch - maybe the Empress will throw some pennies their way as she and her court lackeys genuflect and grovel towards all things Great and Gates?
She's going to sue you and charlie for what some anonymous internet ding-a-ling posted from Wallingford or Warsaw or Santiago or San Diego?
ha ha - what an embarrassment to our species - we promote people like her to positions of authority ?
just send her legal eagle team a picture of Rosemary Wood erasing that 13 minutes tape segment ... that should throw them off the scent for a few years.
NOTdkosWuMing
What, pray tell, is the departing Dr. Enfield afraid of. Mayby it really is the middle school clique thing, that she will be taunted by the cool kids she previously thought were her friends if they become suspicious that she's been interacting with the outcasts.
Oompah
Interested
Personally, I rather like exposing the blowhards and pompous *ssh*les for what their are. It doesn't take much. Just read their emails.
Funny, Enfield doesn't write emails much anymore...
"to use the name of someone, esp God (or, apparently, the departing Superintendent), without due respect or reverence"
Beware - Dr. Enfield is no dummy. She knew that she could generate a distraction by threatening to put you or any of your readers in their locker if you crossed her again. So the question is, for what is this silliness providing the distraction, the cover?
Oompah
-Disgusted
No amount of "Odd Girl Out" books or "Miss Representation" documentaries will alleviate the rash of mean girls as long as folks like this are running the show. Have fun, Highline!
practical and looking for solutions
Enfield sure wasn't classy here.
Most posters on this thread aren't either.
Enfield is moving on and we should too.
Mr White
I do not disagree that many issues have been exposed by Melissa. My point is that once one has been determined to be a thorn that only irritates those she is trying tp persuade than it just might be time to pass the baton to the pereson that can communicate in an unabrasive manner and yet still discuss the truth.
It is obvious to me that Melissa has become that thorn and many people cannot, do not want to take what she has to say into any consideration because they have been rubbed raw so many times by her.
@Annie
Perhaps if these fragile egos just fixed the damn messes that they themselves largely create, there would be no need for thorns.
These people are highly paid professionals. Take the heat or move on.
And if the Civic "leaders" have hurt feelings, ditto. Spend less time worrying and whispering about criticism and more time solving problems. (Insert favorite paid lobbyist or local millionaire's name here.)
The Seattle Times comments have a Terms of Service agreement that prohibits:
"Identifiable impersonations of another individual, by false representations in the text, by creating a misleading screen name that misrepresents the poster's identity in an identifiable fashion, or by utilizing another individual's account to post, with or without that individual's knowledge"
Of course the Seattle Times comments Terms of Service also prohibits:
Content that is untrue, inaccurate, deliberately misleading, or trade libelous"
-trader
Annie, Charlie and I have many points, not just one. We want a better run district with better academic outcomes for all students. That's maybe one point but others radiate off it.
Productive? We have exposed a lot of issues and provided a forum for parents to get information, discuss issues and solutions and yes, even praise the districts, its staff and its students for accomplishments.
I always smile when people say move on because it usually means go away. I will love the day I can move on knowing that our district is on the right track and in good hands.
As for how I felt about the Enfield issue, certainly not bullied. Annoyed, amused but please understand, I am not worried in the slightest with what I'm sure she thinks are cautionary words. (I decline to call them a threat.)
I think the right call is that yes, the blog has gone beyond a thorn in anyone's side to a full-fledged entity that can no longer be marginalized, minimized or ignored.
Look, it speaks volume that people must resort to this blog to communicate to one another, to the district, the media, and the power that be. It speaks that we have few outlets where we are listened to and have a place to speak so that others may listen. For those who don't like this blog, you can turn it off. There are many other websites and blogs that can speak to your kind if you want back up singers. I for one may not always agree with the content and some speakers, but I AM SO GLAD we have it!
-practical and looking for solutions
It is disturbing that Enfield would show this level of interest and pique, when you consider the # of embarassments that are going on on her watch and with her tacit endorsement. I know of families who are trying hard to get her attention and action on things that should not be happening, and that her Ed Directors show no interest or capacity to resolve. It's disheartening to learn that she is sweating the small stuff instead.
Also not impressed.
I would hope if someone posted using my name and represented themselves as me, it would be against the blog policy and it would be deleted. (I wouldn't whine about it, however; I'd just ask the blog managers to delete the post).
The Seattle Times comments have a Terms of Service agreement that prohibits:
"Identifiable impersonations of another individual, by false representations in the text, by creating a misleading screen name that misrepresents the poster's identity in an identifiable fashion, or by utilizing another individual's account to post, with or without that individual's knowledge"
"request for help:
Please start a threat(sic - thread?) on how to handle Dr Enfield. There are many of us in Highline who are quite nervous and not sure what to do."
reposted by Oompah
stu
WSDWG
Sounds like the district is looking for ANY excuse to threaten or silence you.
They do that.
It's a thousand times worse when you work for them and your ability to feed your family is controlled by them.
Don't sweat it, you're on firm legal ground.
When you work for them, they act like a corrupt cop following you for a hundred miles until you forget to signal your turn and then order you out of the car taze you when you're already lying face down on the asphalt.
Well, as Adam or Jamie would say, "Myth Busted."
I'm not by any means condoning posting under another person's name, but pointing out how stupid a claim of legal action is in this case.
What loss could Dr. Enfield suffer if someone - clearly as a parody - signs their comment with her name?
Sarah Palin could not sue Tina Fey, Lorne Micheals, or NBC for impersonating her, and Dr. Enfield cannot sue an anonymous commenter, Melissa, or Blogger for impersonating her in a similar fashion. It's not exactly identity theft.
Also, what could she sue for? What loss did she suffer? In dollars and cents what loss did she suffer?
It is an empty threat, and empty threats are the tools of a bully. An obviously empty threat is the tool of a stupid bully. The emptiness of this threat is pretty obvious to all of us.
Like a lawyer who tries to get the case (with overwhelming damning evidence) overurned on a technicality, Enfield looks desperate to try to regain her good girl image by pretending to be the victim of an unfair attack (a classic middle school mean girl behavior).
Sorry, Susan Enfield. You lost in the court of public opinion because of your own words and deeds--not because of the first amendment.
Most teachers were aware of your phoniness from jump street. Quite a few of us encountered that Nurse Ratched smile (which accompanied a patronizing reply) when we asked a few simple questions about making the curriculum better.
That behavior doesn't last long in the real world--at least if you want to stay at a job for more than two or three years.
--enough already
Anyway...perhaps En-field is concerned because I did my usual "educatin'" of the the public (and boards in a number of districts BTW) about her actions and attitudes behind the scenes while she was on her "victory/spite lap".
Perhaps, she figures she can't touch me, but will harass Melissa. For that Melissa I am truly sorry.
Just as a reminder, My name's Cecilia. Attorneys can find me at most board meetings. Not concerned because just about everything I present is backed by administrators' own word and actions.
I look forward to Mr. Banda not feeling like he can't show his true self via emails, once exposed...
Thinking about how Melissa was treated, I kept thinking -- what must it be like for those whose paychecks and professional reputations she controls? I know not all of the District's employees are perfect -- but I feel really badly that so many wonderful teachers and staff have had to endure Dr. E, her hench-Executive Directors, and her predecessor, MGJ, for so long.
We are sorry, teachers and staff (at least I am). We are doing the best we can (without money, power, or influence -- except our vote) to change things for the better.
. . .(but we sure could use your help in cleaning up the leadership mess at the SEA -- which is something we can't touch, but you can).
That said, I wouldn't want to get on her bad side.
I for one am incredibly thankful for all the District watchers (not just Melissa and Charlie, but Dorothy and many others, who go to meetings, dig up information, hunt for documents the District is trying to hide, report on what is done and not done at committee meetings, etc.
It is harder to manage well than to manage like S#$&#*^T. Under MGJ, Manhas and Olshefske, the District was managed like S#$&#*^T. Under MGJ and Dr. E, the Directors attempted to not govern at all (by ed reform design -- leaving bad management to reign undisturbed at the top.) If we want a District that runs well, we need to keep pushing for better goverance and better management -- and more involvement by families and other Seattle citizens in our public schools.
The bureaucrats who would prefer to do less, and the ed reform folks who really want to just sell the entire thing to private enterprise while no one is looking, or no one cares, would both like nothing more than for the District watchers with the longest memories and the most history (and Melissa and Charlie are two of them) to go away.
I got out of SPS (in large part) because of the complacency of my co-workers.
You have absolutely no power left when the little bit you have (via union membership) is squandered.
I still can't believe that Knapp was elected.
--enough already
Go to an organization sometime where a truly fairminded executive manages things. You will see much less syrupy fawning over staff and underlings -- but much fairer, more evenhanded treatment of everyone -- across the board. Their workers don't have to curry favor and carry political water to get entry to some mystical "inner group." In fact, they know it won't work. They don't have a corruptible boss. All they have to do (and in fact the only thing they CAN do) to get ahead is do their jobs well and treat everyone else like their employer treats them!
What a concept!
StopTFA said “Perhaps, she figures she can't touch me, but will harass Melissa.” Being anonymous or using a pseudonym on the net is no longer a protection from being sued, and she (or her lawyers) can reach out and find you. See the link: 'Anonymous' Posters to Pay $13 Million for Defamatory Comments. This is not “mean girl” behavior – saying that is just politically correct claptrap. It sounds as though she was just providing a friendly warning. An unfriendly warning would have been a letter from an attorney. Free speech has limits. If you don’t know that, you should go back to school.
I don’t know what exactly was said, or when it was said, and I presume the circumstances are much different. But that linked article is a warning indicator of what can happen if you make defamatory remarks
No defamatory remarks. Simply public information, that one wouldn't know if they simply listened to Lynne Varner, Frank Greer, Jon Bridge and others.
Can I sue them? Turnabout is fair play. Again, they know where to find me.
But, you know what, I am retired effective 6/30/12. I'm goin' to Disneyland!
I suppose saying the Deformers are liars and Billy Boot Lickers is the same as what you link to
'... filed a suit against anonymous commenters who accused them of being sexual deviants, molesters, and drug dealers on Topix, once self-described as "the country's largest local forum site."'
Which 1 of The Man do you work for? You don't know what was said - are you talkign from a legalistic try to scare everyone perspective, or, did you not read Melissa's diary - it seems pretty clear what was said - of course, I also happen to think that too much of what the legal profession does is just corruption, and I also happen to think that the amount of Ju$tice I get is directly related to how much money I have -
I suppose I should tremble after reading your link?
I shouldn't wonder if you're
AMcCarthyite?
I'm the FOIA mistaker--you don't need to lecture the requestees about the definition of a PRA. They obviously know what one is and how to do a request.
These public servants have done the city's children, families and teachers a major service by exposing the truth about who is running this school district and how it operates.
Those exposed should be ashamed of themselves rather than blaming one of the messengers (who promptly deleted and formally reprimanded the clueless poster of that name).
By the way, Melissa...
Congratulations on your article in the Washington Post. Did Dr. Enfield get a chance to express her regards about your rise to the national stage?
--enough already
However, if a lawsuit were actually brought against Melissa and this blog, it would end up making Dr Enfield look absolutely ridiculous, and vindictive and petty to boot. The damage to her reputation would be far greater than any perceived benefit from silencing her critics. This is why Santorum never filed a suit against Dan Savage, for example.
AC Service The Woodlands
AC Service Kenosha
Air Conditioning Service Spring Branch
AC Repair Friendswood
Ac Service Montgomery