- The full extent of my original reaction to your article was “Zheesh.” Go back and look. Some “attack.”
- I did not attempt to get you in trouble with your editor. I called and attempted to get a correction, and learned that you were no longer with the paper. I then sent a follow-up e-mail to the editor after the OIG report was issued, indicating that the data was encrypted, and that he might consider doing a correction. I have no idea whether he ever did.
- I have never said, or implied, that I got you fired from the Advocate. Ever.
- Q. Why did your article come to my attention? A. Because I have a Google Alert set up for “identity theft.” It has nothing to do with your first name, your last name, your maiden name, your husband’s name, your marital status, your involvement or lack thereof with any other causes, or your newspaper’s location.
- I recognize when people do good work. Patrick Poole does good work that others are too lazy or too PC to do. But if you have any complaints about his work, your beef is with him, not me.

Buh-bye.

Your and my only quarrel was over whether or not the data in the stolen State of Ohio data devices was encrypted. It wasn’t. The OIG said so. “Dispute” over.

You were wrong. You never admitted it. Everything you write from this point forward is tainted by that….. until you admit that you were wrong, and that you’re sorry about the abusive comments you left at the time you were shown to be wrong.

That’s the first and last contact I would prefer to have with you, and there’s nothing about that incident that I would say to your face that I haven’t indicated already in comments. Despite your attempts to invent another quarrel over something else, we don’t have one.