https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html

In article <um57bc$1onuq$1@dont-email.me>,
Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:
>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html

Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?

Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)
--
"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." - Steve Ballmer

Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:

>>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html

>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?

>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)

I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
the addressbar of your browser.

I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
is proper. The author can choose what medium of communication to use.
If it wasn't Usenet, reposting it in full is not fair use.

Quoting from it and commenting on it, of course, are fair use.

In article <um74bk$24ver$1@dont-email.me>,
Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
....
>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?
>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)
>
>I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
>the addressbar of your browser.

You do. You're just using that turn-of-phrase in the rhetorical way.

It's not that I "Don't have the ability". It's just a bit of a PIA to do it.

>I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
>is proper. The author can choose what medium of communication to use.
>If it wasn't Usenet, reposting it in full is not fair use.

I don't think anybody really worries about copyright nonsense anymore.

I've certainly seen most people just post stuff verbatim - especially in
this NG (a.o).

And, no, I'm not going to get into the usual argument about whether or not
that makes it right.

--
Every time a Republican gets caught doing something illegal (i.e., just about every
day or two), they always immediately issue two simultaneous statements about it:
1) "I didn't do it" (Standard denial, which of course only cult-members pay any attention to)
2) "Here's how I did it and why I did it and why it shouldn't matter to you and why you should go back to watching sports on TV"

Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>...

>>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?
>>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)

>>I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
>>the addressbar of your browser.

>You do. You're just using that turn-of-phrase in the rhetorical way.

>It's not that I "Don't have the ability". It's just a bit of a PIA to do it.

C'mon. Copy-n-paste is not a pain in the ass if there's a touch pad or
mouse. If you have neither, you have to explain your comment.

>>I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
>>is proper. The author can choose what medium of communication to use.
>>If it wasn't Usenet, reposting it in full is not fair use.

>I don't think anybody really worries about copyright nonsense anymore.

That's the opinion of people who are not the author. Certainly the author does.

>I've certainly seen most people just post stuff verbatim - especially in
>this NG (a.o).

>And, no, I'm not going to get into the usual argument about whether or not
>that makes it right.

> >>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?

'As a mother, she was violent, hateful and cruel': Daughter writes SCATHING obituary for her estranged mother

Gayle Harvey Heckman condemned her mother in an eye-popping obituary
She claimed her mom Linda Stull allowed her partners to sexually abuse her
The obituary was later un-published, a decision that Heckman hit out at

By WILL POTTER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

A daughter decided to take one last shot at her 'violent, hateful and cruel' mother as she condemned her in a scathing obituary.

In a fiery 'tribute' following the death of Linda Lernel Stull in Michigan on December 12, her daughter Gayle Harvey Heckman wrote in her hometown paper that she subjected her to years of physical, verbal, emotional and sexual abuse.

'Lernell allowed for her many inappropriate suitors to sexually abuse Gayle,' a section of the shocking obituary read. It concluded that her family 'all understand that the world is a much better place without her.'

After the obituary sparked a huge reaction online, Willcox Newspaper, which published the piece, tore it down from their website and apologized, claiming it was 'submitted through our website, and was published without a good look on our part.'

Heckman hit out at the decision to un-publish the obituary, and criticized the newspaper's stance to 'protect and shield child abusers', according to a purported response shared to X.

Heckman hardly pulled any punches as she summed up her mother's life, and told the Sturgis Journal she decided to write the savage eulogy 'to clear my name.'

'For 24 years and before that, my mother has had to come up with a reason as to why her daughter isn’t in her life that doesn’t make her look like a monster.… I had to reclaim my name,' she said.

Heckman opened the obituary - which used the alternate spellings 'Lernel', 'Lernell' and 'Lernal' - by noting her mother was 'welcomed to the world by loving parents' on October 1, 1951, and she went on to give birth to her first child, Gayle, in 1969.

'Lernel deceived her first husband, Roderick Alan Harvey, into believing that he was her first child's biological father,' the tribute read.

'They married and divorced when Gayle was 3-years-old. Lernel then had Gayle adopted by her 2nd husband, Frank Randall Cullum. They divorced after a decade of marriage - Gayle never heard from Frank again.'

Heckman then dropped the bombshell that 'Lernal's 3rd husband, James Floyd Hart, sexually abused Gayle when she was 13. Instead of protecting her daughter, Lernal accused Gayle of "trying to steal her husband" and proceeded to beat her senselessly.'

'After another divorce, Lernel acquired her 4th husband through the (unofficial or illegible) word-of-mouth inmate-run Jackson State Prison pen pal 'program'', the piece continued.

'In between and during her marriages, there were a variety of unsavory men in and out of our home.

'As a mother, Lernal was violent, hateful, and cruel. She physically, mentally, emotionally, verbally, and financially abused Gayle.

'Lernell allowed for her many inappropriate suitors to sexually abuse Gayle.. Lernel's abuse continued into Gayles's adulthood, attempting to physically, verbally, emotionally, and mentally abuse her in front of her children.

'Gayle had to establish a no-contact order to protect herself and her family. That was 24 years ago.'

She said that in March of 2023, she unexpectedly found out who her biological father was 'through a popular online DNA service'.

'After years of deception from Lernel regarding who Gayle's father was, Gayle and her family are navigating the waters of getting to know their paternal biological family.

'This is it. Lernal will never be the mother and grandmother that she could have chosen to be to her family. That door is closed forever with her death. That is what Gayle and her family grieve, who their mother and grandmother could have been.

'While they are afraid that Gayle, her husband, and their 4 children can not share their grief, their heartache lies with Lernal's brothers and sisters, their aunts, uncles, and cousins, as they grieve the death of a complicated family member, whom they love very much.

'Lernal passed away December 12, 2023, in Three Rivers, MI, and will now face judgment.

'Gayle and her family forgive Lernal and hope that she has found peace. They also hope to find peace within themselves.

'Lernal will not be missed by Gayle or her family. They all understand that the world is a much better place without her.'

When the eye-popping obituary was published, it sparked a huge online reaction, leading the publisher to admit they didn't actually read it before allowing the piece to go to print.

'It was submitted through our website, and was published without a good look on our part,' said Mike Wilcox, the publisher of Wilcox Newspaper.

'We took it down from (the) website after complaints about its content poured in. After taking (it) down, several (mostly the daughter) complaints and phone calls were received admonishing us for doing so.'

In a purported response from Heckman shared to X, she slammed the decision to un-publish the piece.

'As most survivors know, we expect to be attacked by child abuse apologists for not falling into line,' she reportedly said.

'Especially, when there's deep generational trauma. My name has been defamed by my abuser for my entire life.

'Most especially, when she had to explain why her daughter wasn't in her life. The obituary in part, was to reclaim my name.

'To set the record straight once and for all. I am Lernals daughter. I am her 'family'. My truth, just like the obituary, isn't fake.

'Wilcox paper has made their stance clear. They protect and shield child abusers. Even in death. People who protect monsters are no different to me than my abuser.'

PUBLISHED: 15:18 EST, 22 December 2023 | UPDATED: 01:56 EST, 23 December 2023

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>>Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:
>
>>>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html
>
>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?
>
>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)
>
> I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
> the addressbar of your browser.

Copy-and-paste is for the icky GUI types.
NNTP reading should be done in a CLI environment.
> I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
> is proper.

I agree on that.

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

Louis Epstein <le@main.lekno.ws> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>>>Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:

>>>>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html

>>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?

>>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)

>>I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
>>the addressbar of your browser.

>Copy-and-paste is for the icky GUI types.
>NNTP reading should be done in a CLI environment.

hahahahaha

I'm not using a genuine terminal but an emulation. GNOME terminal on the
Linux Mint laptop and PuTTY on the Windows 8.1 machine. I can use the
touchpad or mouse to copy a URL, then paste into the browser's address
bar.
>>I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
>>is proper.

>I agree on that.

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> Louis Epstein <le@main.lekno.ws> wrote:
>>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>>>>Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html
>
>>>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?
>
>>>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)
>
>>>I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
>>>the addressbar of your browser.
>
>>Copy-and-paste is for the icky GUI types.
>>NNTP reading should be done in a CLI environment.
>
> hahahahaha
>
> I'm not using a genuine terminal but an emulation. GNOME terminal on the
> Linux Mint laptop and PuTTY on the Windows 8.1 machine. I can use the
> touchpad or mouse to copy a URL, then paste into the browser's address
> bar.

Sometimes I read straight in my shell,this time I'm reading in a fvwm
window.

The mouse is just for making a particular window active so I can
invoke tin in it.
Using Seamonkey or Firefox windows is separate.

>>>I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
>>>is proper.
>
>>I agree on that.

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 17:11:17 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>>Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:
>
>>>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html
>
>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?
>
>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)
>
>I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
>the addressbar of your browser.

I need to know whether I'm interested in reading it first. News sites
provide a generally awful reading experience. The odds of me reading an
article from a news site based on a headline alone are in the low single
digits. Give me a better idea of what I might see, and they go way up.

>I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
>is proper. The author can choose what medium of communication to use.
>If it wasn't Usenet, reposting it in full is not fair use.
>
>Quoting from it and commenting on it, of course, are fair use.

Usenet was not invented so that people can share hyperlinks, and that's
not the reason any of us are here. The magic of this group happens when
discussions get going about a topic where we have a common interest, i.e.
obituaries and related subjects. So far, I don't see that anyone has
discussed this one; we've just commented on posting protocol.

Give us something to discuss besides a headline and a URL

David Carson

--
Dead or Alive Data Base
http://www.doadb.com

David Carson <davidc@wa-wd.com> wrote:
>Sat, 23 Dec 2023 17:11:17 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:
>>Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>>>Travoltron <Travoltron@fakeemail.com> wrote:

>>>>https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12894659/mother-Daughter-SCATHING-obituary.html

>>>Just out of curiosity, why not post the text here, so we can read it?

>>>Why make us chase the URL? (Which, for me, takes fair amount of doing)

>>I don't understand why you don't have the ability to copy-n-paste into
>>the addressbar of your browser.

>I need to know whether I'm interested in reading it first. News sites
>provide a generally awful reading experience. The odds of me reading an
>article from a news site based on a headline alone are in the low single
>digits. Give me a better idea of what I might see, and they go way up.

>>I don't think a full-text copyright infringement quote of a current article
>>is proper. The author can choose what medium of communication to use.
>>If it wasn't Usenet, reposting it in full is not fair use.

>>Quoting from it and commenting on it, of course, are fair use.

>Usenet was not invented so that people can share hyperlinks,

Usenet predates the World Wide Web, so of course that's true.

>and that's not the reason any of us are here.

I'll share what I damn well please as long as I can communicate in plain
text. In plain text, I'll share any URL relevant to what I'm discussing.
It's NOT a hyperlink because I NEVER send HTML. NEVER

But URLs can be copied and pasted into the addressbar of the browser
regardless of whether the newsreader can parse the entire URL and make
it clickable. Kenny hasn't explained why it takes a fair amount of
doing.

>The magic of this group happens when
>discussions get going about a topic where we have a common interest, i.e.
>obituaries and related subjects. So far, I don't see that anyone has
>discussed this one; we've just commented on posting protocol.

>Give us something to discuss besides a headline and a URL

That's fair enough. When I discuss an article I found on the Web, I
comment on it, summarizing portions of the article as I'm commenting.
You can read the Web page or not. What I try to avoid doing is a full
text quote.

In article <um8987$2efh9$1@dont-email.me>,
David Carson <davidc@wa-wd.com> wrote:
....
>I need to know whether I'm interested in reading it first. News sites
>provide a generally awful reading experience. The odds of me reading an
>article from a news site based on a headline alone are in the low single
>digits. Give me a better idea of what I might see, and they go way up.
>
>Usenet was not invented so that people can share hyperlinks, and that's
>not the reason any of us are here. The magic of this group happens when
>discussions get going about a topic where we have a common interest, i.e.
>obituaries and related subjects. So far, I don't see that anyone has
>discussed this one; we've just commented on posting protocol.
>
>Give us something to discuss besides a headline and a URL

Yes! To all of the above.

--
The randomly chosen signature file that would have appeared here is more than 4
lines long. As such, it violates one or more Usenet RFCs. In order to remain
in compliance with said RFCs, the actual sig can be found at the following URL:
http://user.xmission.com/~gazelle/Sigs/ItsTough