Benson Vs McBee

February 11, 2010 at 6:25 pm 64 comments

Woo-hoo, deja vu. Sandi Benson is once again threatening legal action, or, at the very least, stating her intent to maybe, perhaps, pursue legal action against our beloved Chick. You may recall that Sandi warned (or threatened) Chick that legal action may be forthcoming back in  September. I wrote about the kerfuffle here, if you care to catch up.

Today, Sandi has a new post up, entitled Revenge. [NOTE: This blog entry has since been removed.] Maybe it’s just little ole moi, but I find it’s a little confusing. On one hand, Sandi informs us she has lawyers on retainer, and is actively pursuing legal action against Michele McBee, the owner and author of Poop On Peeps. On the other hand, though, she seems to be asking her readers for their opinions on how she should handle dear Chick. She says:

“Do I fight dirty with dirty, and air all of her dirty laundry to expose how imperfect these judgemental people are,  how they are guilty of many of the things that they are so cruel and quick to judge others about? Should I post pictures of her and open up the comments for you to all join in and trash talk her appearance?  Her remark to this will be that I put my picture out there and she doesn’t.  If that’s the case, how did I get the photos?

Or do I just take it to the courts and let her be exposed publicly via the legal process and let you all find out her real identity via public record of court proceeding?  Is it better to drag her through court proceedings and make her get her own attorneys to prove lack of malicious intent and desire to defame and cyber harass on that awful website?”

Maybe it really is little ole moi, but I would think if you have lawyers on retainer, or as Sandi says, “we have and have a legal team in place ready to go“, then why would you be putting this forth for discussion?  That post almost comes across as a dare to her readers – expose any and all details about Chick that can be unearthed. Kinda confusing, too, on the whole “let you all find out her real identity via public record of court proceeding” thing, considering Chick’s real name has been pretty darned public for a long time now. It seems a little disingenuous to write, in one post, about her legal options, and at the same time rip Chick a new one. More likely Sandi was trying to vent frustrations, and maybe garner a little more sympathy for herself. She’s probably figured out that her stats increase, and she gets tons more readers every time she mentions Chick, or Chick mentions her.

It’s not surprising to me that Sandi is on the offensive, being on the receiving end of Chick’s pointy stick must not be pleasant. Her methods, though, leave a lot to be desired. She crossed a line that many would not, myself included, when she published a link on her blog for the “virtual” gravesite of a premature infant Chick buried many years ago. Chick has repeatedly said if you put it out there, it’s fair game, but I’m sure that she never envisioned a situation like this.  However, as we all know, the internet does not forget, or forgive and Chick’s real name has been widely known for quite a while now; she’s known for the better part of a year that people are actively searching information about her. If she wanted to keep a private affair private, she should have perhaps removed, or protected that memorial site. You can’t live a double life and not expect one to spill onto the other and create a ground in, messed up stain on your “real” life. If you spend your days trying to think of new ways to torment the same four or five people over and over again, it’s no surprise that they fight back. All the same, I don’t condone what Sandi did.  

Chick’s sycophantic followers, however, are up in arms. How dare she!!! She’s not a REAL mother!!!!  She should be arrested!!!! While I do, on some level, feel for Chick on this one, I can’t stomach the two-faced outrage. Sandi didn’t create a site mocking Chick’s miscarriage. Chick has repeatedly mentioned losing a child, and the “special” club she belongs to; she created that site, and put her name on it. I’m sure she never expected to have it show up on an attackee’s blog, but those are the chances you take, aren’t they? Anything, people, anything you’ve attached your name to online can come back to haunt you. Even things you would prefer never see the light of day, things that are intensely personal.

The most interesting aspect of the conversation at le Poop is the enormous double standard Chick is perpetrating. She has frequently mentioned being part of a “special” club of parents, those who have lost and buried a child. She will not write about, or even allow comments about, women who have lost a child.  She says a miscarriage is not the same as losing a child, and only holds sympathy for those who’ve buried a child.  She has declared all who’ve endured her pain off limits, but lesser mortals such as Dooce and Sandi are fair game because, after all, they only had miscarriages, not lost real, live babies. From her entry A Note From Me, she comments: 

“you know there’s a difference. Pretty much every woman I know has had a miscarriage, and that’s a lot of women. Picking out a casket, buying a plot, the service, the loss, really?! Seriously!”

On the whole, I can agree with her. My heart aches for anyone who’s lost a child, it’s unimaginable to me.  A mid-term miscarriage is just as unthinkable to me. But can you equate one with the other? Should the death of a child you’ve known, loved, rocked to sleep, fed in the middle of the night, and worried over ever be put in the same category as the loss of a mid-term fetus? Where do you draw the line? A 21 week fetus is a baby that deserves perpetual mourning and respect, but the loss of a lesser fetus is somehow not painful enough to be remarkable?  One of the Chicklets asked just that in an angry tirade. She says:

“You carried a baby to 21 weeks, I have carried one to 20 weeks, another almost 18, and several others for a couple of weeks. And you think your pain was more special than that? You think that whatever pain you endured was easier than my having to her from doctors that because my baby wasn’t “viable”, I was lucky to have lost it when I did? It was harder for you because you had a child to bury? It was harder for you because you got the luxury of a service? Somehow you are more special than I because you had to pick out a casket, and have a gravesite to visit? Fuck that, you ARE NOT.”

Chick’s thoughtful response was:

 “I think when your birth a child, or you raise your child and they’re taken away by illness like Heather spohr, or in an accident then yes it is different.”

You might note the clever sidestepping Chick did there, not even answering the question put forth. She does, however, try to portray herself as a woman who has lost a child, like the Spohrs, not just endured a miscarriage, like Sandi and Dooce, and innumerable others. As painful and heart-wrenching as that must be, I don’t think for a moment that it equates to a parent losing a child. No matter what the circumstances.

Entry filed under: Uncategorized. Tags: , , , , , , , , .

What’s new, Chicken? Farewell, Chicken

64 Comments Add your own

  • 1. M  |  February 11, 2010 at 9:28 pm

    Aren’t you doing the same thing here as Sandi Benson did? I’ve lost a child and if some stranger on the internet started debating my grief I’d lose my mind.

    I read Poop on Peeps for the humour and comic relief. I don’t always agree with her but this situation is different

  • 2. The Queen B  |  February 11, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    I’m sorry for your loss, but the point of what I was saying is not that Chick lost a child, or if her grief should know any boundaries. What I am saying here is that this is yet another of her double standards – she miscarried, but has no sympathy for others who have miscarried. Her stated policy is no commenting on anyone who’s suffered the loss of a child, because she has. She only identifies with those parents, and not the ones who have been through similar situations as her. As a matter of fact, she’s declared a ban on any further discussion of the subject – just one more example of how she chooses to moderate the comments, contrary to her stated comment policy.

  • 3. Sahm  |  February 12, 2010 at 3:25 am

    Is it just me, or does anyone else find this–ALL of this debating back and forth about grief and loss and parenting–absolutely despicable? And between grown women. I just don’t get it. Women are supposed to lift each other up not tear each other apart. We are mothers raising our kids and this is the example we’re setting for them? That mudslinging and bullying is okay just because you see things differently?

  • 4. Tammy  |  February 12, 2010 at 6:20 pm

    I agree Sahm.

    However I also fully agree with what Sandi did. That may not be the popular response but I feel for Sandi I really do. I mean what do you do when a bully targets you and just won’t stop. Yes you can walk away and ignore them, but then they are still slamming you to any potential readers and possibly costing you revenue, even if you aren’t reading the crap.

    I have to say I would have done far worse. In fact I think I would have turned up on her doorstep and said ‘How ya like me now, Bitch?’

  • 5. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 12, 2010 at 7:44 pm

    “Women are supposed to lift each other up not tear each other apart. ”

    Oh please. Says who? Who made up this asinine rule?

    Stupid women who whip out their dead babies and bad knees for sympathy and then sob when the wrong people notice absolutely deserve to be torn apart. Often.

    One can only hope the tearing apart will cause a new organ, such as a BRAIN, to finally grow from the scar tissue.

    You want to be an idiot, you’re on your own. Lift your own damn self up. And if you are teaching your children to coddle losers you are doing them a grave disservice.

  • 6. The Queen B  |  February 13, 2010 at 4:51 am

    Gotta say – I hate that line. It’s so trite, and ridiculous. Women are supposed to lift each other up? Since when? Women have ripped each other to shreds since the beginning of time. They’ll turn on you faster than you can blink.

  • 7. Nonchalant  |  February 14, 2010 at 12:47 am

    Oh, its clear Chick has a double standard.

    She said she wouldn’t allow any more comments on the miscarriage issue, but let several through without allowing my followup comment as to whether the “miscarriage” my mother suffered at 6 months of term qualified as well. Chick’s standards for what is OK and not OK change position with the blowing of the wind.

    Of course, it is her blog, and what she chooses or not to publish or allow there, is up to her. But if she believes that she is not as transparent as saran wrap, she is wrong.

    I miss the old days when she referred to Dooce as “skelator” (which bugs the crap out of me, dude, its spelled SKELETOR!) – at least the real purpose of her blog was more obvious.

  • 8. Tammy  |  February 14, 2010 at 2:34 am

    I see my comment is still awaiting moderation. Not sure why, but hope I didn’t offend.

  • 9. The Queen B  |  February 14, 2010 at 3:16 am

    Nonchalant – There are days when it seems like she invented the double standard!

    It drives me nuts that more people don’t see through her, but I guess for every idiot, there is a leader. But how many times do we have to hear how “at least CL allows dissenting opinions”. Bullshit. Total crap. She has probably unapproved more comments than she approves. And never does she bother to respond to the legitimate questions from readers, only replies to those who already suck up to her fat ass. Yep, it’s her blog, but I would just wish she’d admit that she rarely lets through any real dissenting comments.

  • 10. The Queen B  |  February 14, 2010 at 3:51 am

    That’s exactly why I feel the way I do. Chick is a bully, there’s no doubt there. How can anyone stand by and ignore what happens over there? Chick hereself is bad enough, but the things her Chicklets say and do is beyond me. Am I doing the right thing here? Maybe, maybe not. But for now, it’s the only thing I know how to do. Someone needs to bring this situation to light. A bully like Michele McBee won’t be stopped easily.

  • 11. pmc  |  February 14, 2010 at 3:02 pm

    I have never posted on a blog before. I check Dooce’s site from time to time and when Chicken McBee was exposed for nasty behavior, checked out POP. If there is such a thing as karma, I wouldn’t want to be Michelle. She clearly has self esteem issues…hence the very personal attacks (me thinks she doth protest too much that they aren’t personal).In order to bolster her poor self-image, she tears down other people. And she talks about all the bad things that happen to her???? Hello? She surrounds herself with so much negativity. It’s bad enough that her writing (not just spelling but basic grammar) is horrendous, but her ‘arguments’ are weak and poorly thought out. I’m reading “The Lucifer Effect” for a class…why seemingly good people do bad things…parts are a textbook study of Michelle.

  • 12. Tammy  |  February 14, 2010 at 6:43 pm

    I applaud you and I definately think you are doing the right thing. It would be very easy to just sit back and watch the train wreck but the reality is, Chicken Liver is hurting people. It isn’t fair.
    I also do not believe that just because someone posts a blog about an issue means that people should be able to slam the blogger about said issue. It’s a little like, ‘I can say I’m fat but if you do, I’ll rip your lips off’. Same principal, ya know?

  • 13. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 14, 2010 at 7:04 pm

    Chicken Shit has removed the online memorial.

    Now I understand why she had to change high schools for her senior year.

  • 14. Sue  |  February 15, 2010 at 11:54 am

    I enjoyed reading this.

    CL has many double standards. I tried to post my first ever comment to her on her “note from me” post. Apparently it was declined. Essentially I asked her what she expected when she went around collecting enemies for a hobby? Does she expect people to be nice to her?! Really?! If I made as many enemies as she did, I’d watch my back better. I don’t fault Sandi at all for using the only weapon in her arsenal to shut her up. And apparently it has at least temporarily worked as there has been a notable lull in CL’s snark over the past two weeks.

  • 15. Fraud McBee  |  February 16, 2010 at 12:49 pm

    Just like any troll Chicken Liver thrives on reactions to her posts from others. She knows she will get a reaction from Sandi and her fans. Or from any other popular blogger’s fans.

    She manufactures inflammatory opinions to stir peace. With her years of trolling experience she has now elevated her status to a more cunning level. The woman is mental. She also indulge in lowest troll form – which is creating multiple identities and impersonating as others and engaging in conversation with herself.

  • 16. Suzanne  |  February 16, 2010 at 5:22 pm

    Hi Queen B,

    I’m Suzanne, and it was my comment to CL that you referenced in your post.

    I thought my question was appropriate for the circumstances, but as you pointed out I didn’t get much of a response. And when I posted a reply to her lack of response to me she never posted it. (And she never posted two of my comments about the cat situation, either) She’s never replied to an email I sent, either.

    It was my feeling that the double standard was a little too obvious and totally unfair. I agree with all who’ve said here, or at Sandi Benson’s blog, this was a miscarriage that she has used to her advantage. I know, it seems a sick thing to say. Some things in life hit you with the force of a ten foot pole, and that was it for me. It was just so plain to see, and if I am wrong, I will burn in hell. But that’s how I feel.

    I had been having issues with her methods for a while and when I looked her up a bit, I found this site. And it all seemed to fall into place for me. It just MADE SENSE.

    I’ve thought of creating a blog where disillusioned Chicken Liver fans can come tell their stories. Not a smash and bash blog, but just somewhere that you can tell why you followed her in the first place, and what eye-opening event lead to you becoming a former reader. What do you think?

  • 17. The Queen B  |  February 16, 2010 at 5:33 pm


    Most of us have had that “ah-ha” moment when it comes to Chick. Sometimes it takes longer than others, but I think eventually everyone realizes that she is so not about protecting anyone.

    I think the blog idea is a great one. Let me know if you decide to do so, I’ll post the link here.

  • 18. Tammy  |  February 16, 2010 at 5:41 pm

    That is so weird Suzanne, I was thinking the same thing. The trouble is, anything that is solely about her she would probably try to shut down. You would have to be able to withstand legal threats up the ying. I may be wrong but other sites have done this and she has responded with legal threats which may or may not be true. I’m inclined to think they aren’t. I doubt that she could afford to have legal representation at her beck and call.
    I would love to see a site that discredits her..for example listing her many many lies, her hypocrisy and if you make it…I’ll be there. Hell I’d even help you. I’m a dab hand at And if you monetized it, you could make a MINT! And have a legal advisor on retainer..LOL.
    Okay I am getting far too excited about this idea..LOL

  • 19. Tammy  |  February 16, 2010 at 5:43 pm

    Ooh ooh…You could post a disclaimer..The contents of this blog are opinion only and do not represent…. and blah blah blah…

  • 20. The Queen B  |  February 16, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    Tammy – I could be wrong, but I thought Suzanne meant to create a site that wasn’t just about bashing the Chicken. I think she’s probably referring to a testimonial type site.

    I received the standard legal threat e-mail from her months ago. Clearly just bullshit thought up by dear Chick, because she ordered me to cease and desist in publishing her old blog, which, of course, I had never done. I think that’s where chickenliverexposed ran into trouble, because they were publishing out takes from, which she owned the sole copyright. Or so I understand. There is no crime in writing about her, and more importantly, sharing your own, personal experiences in dealing with her.

    And as for publishing links, I don’t see any crime in that, either. Anything published to the internet is fair to post, and as long as you don’t exceed fair use guidelines, I don’t see any reason not to post links related to her.

  • 21. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 16, 2010 at 8:13 pm

    Related links are okay? Cool!

    Let’s all take a moment and remind ourselves of the handsome hunk of closeted gay male man meat she married.

    Ohhh, dreamy! Men who sweat while they are stationary are such a turn-on!

  • 22. pmc  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:12 am

    I think such a site is a great idea. There’s really no need to bash Michelle; she is her worst enemy. All that needs to be done is have a place where people can analyze the gaps and hypocrisy of her posts. In addition, those whom she’s censored will be able to post their comments and questions, which will verify the extent of her dishonesty and lack of fair play. She really is a loon. I used to feel sorry for her because I thought she was naive/innocently stupid but she’s definitely touched by something very malignant or evil.

  • 23. fightinghypocrisy  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:36 am
    , I started this site months ago and lost interest. If anyone wants posting access here emailme :

    Once I learnt what a low life she is, I lost interest in her and don’t post anymore there. Funny thing is, most of my hits are from her site dishingthepoop threads. She religiously check there. She likes to be written about her, be it good or bad. If you go read the last comment it is from her stating that why I am not posting more.

  • 24. fightinghypocrisy  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:37 am

    Opps wrong email: Here is the right email:

  • 25. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 2:38 am

    At the risk of starting a shitstorm,,,,and I apologize in advance if this causes hurt feelings or any problems.

    Joyfully anonymous? Didn’t you just do exactly what Chicken liver does? I may be mistaken but I don’t think he has any role in CL’s bullying and attacking his looks just seems a bit unfair. I mean she pretty much deserves everything she gets because she is so ruthless and mean…but does he?

  • 26. The Queen B  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:29 am

    Generally speaking, I have no interest in anything related to her husband, or her family. Like many of you, I’ve looked up whatever there is online, including that profile. It’s a public link so I don’t mind posting it, but as a rule I would prefer not to sink to her level.

  • 27. The Queen B  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:36 am

    PMC, That’s exactly my thoughts. I’m not interested in bashing her, I don’t care what she looks like, where she lives or any of the rest, except as it relates to the hypocritical behaviour she exhibits. Her hypocrisy and lies are the only thing that interests me, and that’s something I won’t stop looking into and writing about.

  • 28. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 3:41 am

    Perhaps that fighting hypocrisy site could be a guest blogging site. Although I wonder how that would work. I do not have a blog and frankly I would be terrified to start one. Although I love to write.
    I shouldn’t be so giddily excited about all this. It’s kind of sad on a whole nother level..but there is something so satisfying about seeing a bully get their just desserts

  • 29. Fighting Hypocrisy  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:05 am

    Hi Tammy,
    If you want posting access, you have to create an account at
    If you send me your email ID you have registered with wordpress, I will add you as a user with contributer rights.
    You will be able to login with your wordpress username/password , which I don’t need to know and post whatever you want.
    Now that I said it here, I have a feeling the first email I will get to be added there will be from ChickenLiver herself, so it will be tough to know who is posting there.

  • 30. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:48 am

    “I may be mistaken but I don’t think he has any role in CL’s bullying and attacking his looks just seems a bit unfair.”

    You’re mistaken. He’s wallowing in the shit right alongside his dearly beloved.

    Besides, Chicken Shit has decided that husbands and children are fair game.

    You must have missed that part too.

  • 31. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    Thanks Fighting hypocrisy, you may be right though. I’ll work on that today.

    Joyfully Anonymous – Whatever, I wasn’t aware that he was doing the same thing as CL. I guess I did miss it. As for Husbands and children being fair game..yes, in her world, they are. But I kinda thought we were better than that. Isn’t that what we are all complaining about? I certainly don’t want to sink to her level. I’d rather argue from a more intellectual standpoint.

    Attacking someones looks? Attack their opinions, their actions, their political stance, their religious views, whatever you want..but their looks? bleh, it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Just sayin.

  • 32. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:23 pm

    Yeah, it leaves a bad taste in your mouth but you keep going back for more.


    Seriously though, I thoroughly commend you for being such a fine, upstanding individual. The internet needs more people like you.

    I’m sure Dooce’s husband and daughter appreciated your support. I mean, you DID speak up about that, didn’t you?


  • 33. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:41 pm


  • 34. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 4:45 pm

    Going back for more? Not sure what that has to do with drawing the line at attacking someones looks, but umm okay. Color me hypocrital.
    Thanks. Apparantly the internet does need more people like me and a lot less people like you and CL. And apparantly you two have a lot more in common than you would admit to.
    Not sure what you are referring to about Dooces husband and daughter.
    Certainly didn’t want to get into a pissing match with you. I was merely voicing my concern at attacking at the same level CL does.

  • 35. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    My apologies (and not just for the appalling The last thing I wanted to do was get into some kind of argument with the very people who feel the same way I do about CL.

  • 36. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 17, 2010 at 6:58 pm

    “Not sure what you are referring to about Dooces husband and daughter.”

    Exactly my point. You don’t have a clue. You obviously haven’t even read the related threads on THIS VERY SITE.

    “Apparantly the internet does need more people like me and a lot less people like you and CL.”

    Yes, I agree. The internet clearly needs more self-absorbed people who believe that their shit smells like roses. People who pretend to be offended yet refuse to move out of the way. People who pass judgment without making any effort to understand the basics of a situation.

    We definitely need more hypocrites and simpletons on the internet.

  • 37. Tammy  |  February 17, 2010 at 9:08 pm


    You are arguing with someone who is clearly on your side but just didn’t agree with calling her husband names. I’m trying to work out just why you are so angry and I am guessing CL must have attacked you personally. I am sure right now CL is laughing her socks off at this and busy telling her minions that we are turning on each other.

    Re: Dooce’s husband and daughter – if you are referring to her comments regarding ‘Vagina Jon’ and how she dresses her daughter. I get it. What exactly would you like me to do? I could certainly bash the ever loving shit out of her for calling him names but I doubt it would get me very far. I commented in defense of Sandi and it fell on deaf ears. I’m not even sure what you are getting at. Should I not comment here at all? Do I not have the right to be offended by her bullying if she hasn’t bullied me? Isn’t that kind of the point of this blog? That people shouldn’t stand by and let it happen? I just happen to think that calling her husband gay will not end it, but perpetuate it.

    I have never said my shit smells like roses or even acted like it. I merely said i didn’t think it was appropriate to attack her husband. God knows I have never been attacked so ferociously or should I say bulllied? Irony…eh.

    And I am certainly not a simpleton. I think I will just leave it there. I really did not want this shitstorm.

  • 38. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 18, 2010 at 4:20 am

    Sigh, thick as the proverbial brick.

    Open your ears and engage your brain. This is not your blog. It’s not your place to tell me what and how I may post.

    It doesn’t matter if you phrase it as a passive aggressive query, what I choose to post here is NONE of YOUR fucking business and if you choose to make it your business, then hell yes I am going to say something.

    This is Queen B’s blog. She is perfectly capable of speaking up for herself. If she has a problem with me, she will let me know and I will accept that. She’s done it before, I’m sure she will do it again.

    “I’m trying to work out just why you are so angry and I am guessing CL must have attacked you personally.”

    Yeah, that’s it exactly. Wow! I’m impressed. You figured it out! Plus, you’re so intuitive, you can assess the emotions of complete strangers on the internet! Yowza! You should work for the FBI or the CIA or something! Our country could really use your deductive talents! You’re going places now, baby!


  • 39. Tammy  |  February 18, 2010 at 2:44 pm

    No YOU are the stupid one. So blinded by your own ignorance , imagined intelligence and anger you can’t see past it. Wanna talk about being a hypocrit? Take a look in the mirror, douche. You do exactly what Chicken Liver does only somehow you think you are better than her??? Dumbass.

    Apparantly you can post what the fuck youwant on anyones blog but CL can’t…on her own blog? *hypocrit*

    Don’t worry I won’t comment here again. Way to drive people away from this blog. Aren’t you so fuckin smart??? I must admit I did wonder why more people weren’t commenting here. Now I know.

    If you read through the comments you will see that Queen B also said she wasn’t interested in her husband and posted the link only because it was public. Idiot. Way to take the cue.

    You are a nasty nasty woman. Nothing I have said to you has warranted any of this response. You are no better than ChickenLiver. You are just looking to fight with anyone. I looked back through other posts and it’s pretty clear in the comments, that anyone that doesn’t agree with you gets fuckin creamed. You should be proud…maybe next week you can visit the local elementary school and start stealing lunch money.

    Wallow in your anger and misery you sad sad woman.

  • 40. The Queen B  |  February 18, 2010 at 9:26 pm

    I’d really prefer if the comment section here didn’t have to descend into petty, bickering madness. You don’t agree – we get it. All comments are posted here unless they completely cross all lines of decency. I trust that a group of adults should be able to moderate themselves.

    That said, I don’t intend for this blog to slip into the pit of hell where Poop on Peeps resides. Yes, I get the hypocrisy and double standard – Chick says, and lets her commentors say whatever they want, no matter how insulting or derogatory. People feel that they should be able to say what they want about her. And here, you can to a certain degree. But if the only thing useful you have to add to the conversation is attacks on appearance or family, then you’re all in the wrong place.

    If you want to discuss Chick’s hypocritical behaviour, then fine. If you feel the need to point out that you don’t find her husband attractive, that’s your perogative. But please do so respectfully. As it stands now, once you have had a comment approved here, you can comment freely, without moderation. I would like to keep it that way.

  • 41. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 19, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    “As it stands now, once you have had a comment approved here, you can comment freely, without moderation.”

    This is not true.

  • 42. The Queen B  |  February 19, 2010 at 11:03 pm

    Joyfully Anonymous,
    No, you are right. That is not completely true. I did put a few other restrictions on commenting, such as links are held in moderation, and a couple of others that off the top of my head I don’t remember. I haven’t even looked at what I put in place in a year or so.

    But the basic point of what I said is true. There have been no comments so far that I haven’t let through. But I reserve the right to moderate my comments should I feel it’s necessary. There are levels to which I wouldn’t sink, and I won’t allow this blog to be used to distribute any information I’m not comfortable with. It is my blog. If it ever comes to a point that I don’t let a comment through, or delete one, I will say so, and explain myself at that time.

    Yourself and others are free to state your opinions, as long as it doesn’t descend into ripping people apart.

  • 43. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 19, 2010 at 11:20 pm

    “But the basic point of what I said is true. ”

    Doesn’t matter. You lose credibility as a blog owner when you don’t tell the complete truth. Especially when you are simultaneously holding another blogger responsible for not telling the complete truth about her blog.

  • 44. Pam  |  February 20, 2010 at 5:15 am

    I am just so glad you are posting again!

    I love a voice of reason!

  • 45. The Queen B  |  February 20, 2010 at 4:57 pm

    Joyfully Anonymous,
    Ok, I checked, and other than holding links in moderation, the only current moderation here is one IP address which is held in moderation. And nothing from that IP has ever been denied. Nothing has been denied, period.

    I think my comment policy here is extremely fair and I don’t think my credibility is lost because I mispoke briefly. I’ve never made a secret of how I do things here, and I never will. But if you’re going to nitpick it to death, then yes, you’re right and I’m wrong.

  • 46. The Queen B  |  February 20, 2010 at 9:43 pm

    Thanks, Pam. I appreciate it!

    I’ve a couple of things on my mind, and a couple of entries pretty much written. Check back, new entry available soon.

  • 47. pmc  |  February 27, 2010 at 9:13 pm

    This is just an observation…not sure how valid it is but I read through the guest posts comments and it seems as though the folks at PoP are much more civil to each other in CL’s absence. One could draw the conclusion that she is the catalyst for the really nasty stuff that goes on there; or like she’s a magnet for evil thoughtless behavior. In her absence, most posters demonstrate they actually think things through before commenting rather than just jumping on CL’s nasty low-down badwagon and going for the throat (and despite what she says, their children)..
    With that said, CL must have enough cognitive ability to realize that good and better things seem to be happening to the people she attacks relentlessly and well, she…she keeps having problems.
    I’m really looking forward to your next post Queen.

  • 48. pmc  |  February 27, 2010 at 9:50 pm

    Hmmmm…I actually just read UC Woman’s response to CL-followers’ posts. UCW’s response is far more gracious and intelligent than the CL detractors’ comments (a few are more of an attack rather than a comment). I wonder if CL will ever realize that when one sleeps with dogs, one wakes up with fleas…happy scratching! CL.

  • 49. Ally  |  February 28, 2010 at 6:48 am

    CL pulled her site – she’ll no longer be blogging, apparently (and I’m not entirely how long ago this happened, so please forgive me if it’s old news).

  • 50. Em  |  February 28, 2010 at 12:13 pm

    CL is down , I wonder what really made her step away , somehow I can’t imagine a family member would , she’d still blog albeit once a week maybe . Something more has happened , maybe Sandi did what she said she was going to do.

  • 51. pmc  |  February 28, 2010 at 3:19 pm

    Her last line about telling the truth…Michelle McBee will be forever known for her lack of honesty and fair play. I hope she’s found a good therapist that will help her look inward instead of pointing fingers. I’m guessing Sandi followed through.

  • 52. Joyfully Anonymous  |  February 28, 2010 at 4:44 pm

    I know what happened.

    Hold on, Chicken Shit. The ride is about to get very, very bumpy for you and what’s left of your family.

  • 53. Mary  |  February 28, 2010 at 8:42 pm

    Dish, JA, DISH!!!

  • 54. just a thought....  |  February 28, 2010 at 10:46 pm

    I too attempted to post a message to Michele after Sandi posted the grave site – I told her that it would seem that she may have hit rock bottom here – and now it is time to sign off and shut down the site. She seems to have done just that today.

  • 55. intrigued  |  February 28, 2010 at 11:23 pm

    comment 52, time to explain pls

  • 56. The Queen B  |  February 28, 2010 at 11:47 pm

    Joyfully Anonymous,
    I’d love to hear what you know about what went down, and I’m not the only one.

  • 57. The Queen B  |  March 1, 2010 at 12:26 am

    I had noticed that as well, but honestly, I had suspected that some of the more vicious attacks are really just Chick under different aliases.

    I’m working on something to post tonight, but it’s obviously going to be a different post now, considering the circumstances. I’m not sure if I’ll ever publish the others I was working on now.

  • 58. Tammy  |  March 1, 2010 at 12:35 am

    DIng Dong…the bitch is gone..LOL

  • 59. pmc  |  March 1, 2010 at 12:40 am

    I hope you do publish your posts, QB, even if they’re dated in light of Michelle’s site’s demise. I’m still trying to understandher cruelty. Her ‘goodbye’ post demonstrates just how delusional she is.

  • 60. tbr  |  March 1, 2010 at 12:52 am

    my bet – sandy went a little further with the legal stuff. “family member” my ass.

  • 61. Sue  |  March 1, 2010 at 12:15 pm

    Well, that was an interesting turn of events. The plot thickens…

  • 62. Val  |  March 1, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    I don’t understand? You have been railing on CL for eons about having her blog, but it is gone and you are still chomping at the bit?

    So Queen B what will you do now that CL is gone. So I’m guessing you’ll close shop too?

    BTW joyfully anon, you don’t know anything. And anything you would say would be suspect because of your deep seeded bitterness. Whatever will you do with you time now that CL is gone, nail cats to stop signs?

    So JA whatever you say, just go the opposite way, and you’ll have the truth. The truth is right there in front of you and you still can’t see it.

    P.S as someone who cleared comments for CL last year with her surgery and this year, the comments never come from CL. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the angry ones are legit.

  • 63. The Queen B  |  March 1, 2010 at 7:09 pm

    What is it you don’t understand? How people can celebrate the end of a malicious hate site? We can debate back and forth forever, but I suspect that anyone as close to Chick as you say you are could never, will never, see her in the same light as I do.

    As for this blog, no, I will not be shutting down. Not now. Now that dear Chick has moved on, perhaps this blog can finally be what it was intended in the beginning.

    Oh, and P.S.? In my book, anyone who claims the kind of closeness you have with Chick is just as suspect in my mind as Chick herself is, or was. You can claim what you like about her comments, but understand that it falls on deaf ears. For all I know, you are Chick.

  • 64. Joyfully Anonymous  |  March 2, 2010 at 7:04 pm

    “P.S as someone who cleared comments for CL last year with her surgery and this year, the comments never come from CL. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the angry ones are legit.”

    Let’s break this down, shall we?

    Michele McBee may be dumber than a bag of dead hammers but even she isn’t dumb enough to manufacture and submit fake comments while the comments section is being moderated by an idiot minion.

    Not to mention that you would not be in a position to determine “never” or otherwise as you were only moderating while Michele McBee, the attention sow, recovered from surgery brought on by her inability to stay away from the donuts.

    The only way you would know what she never does is if you were her or someone who sleeps with his flacid penis nestled in her sagging flesh.

    In other words, you smell like chicken shit and Queen B, who obviously ain’t no dummy from Fresno public school, thinks so too.

    “In my book, anyone who claims the kind of closeness you have with Chick is just as suspect in my mind as Chick herself is, or was. You can claim what you like about her comments, but understand that it falls on deaf ears. For all I know, you are Chick.”

    My guess is it’s Alan, the computer genius and male model.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Add to Technorati Favorites

%d bloggers like this: