Results 1 to 10 of 36
-
05-27-2016, 09:32 AM #1UnregisteredGuest
Facebook
Will the Sarasota Sheriff's Office provide a list of the people that have been blocked from their (our the citizen's) facebook page if a PRR is conducted? Is facebook and any comments that have been deleted a matter of public record per the freedom of information act? Is the Sheriff required to keep those deleted comments since they are a form of public communication? Does the SSO keep a record of all deleted comments from the facebook page? Is the person in charge of social media deleting comments and blocking citizens from the page and under what authorization? After reviewing the page it seems that there are never any bad comments at all. I find this hard to believe when people have such differing opinions, especially on social media. Where is the line drawn between propaganda and realism? The people have a right to see all the comments good bad or indifferent and in my opinion that is the risk you take when you enter the social media world. It can't all be sunshine and rainbows. I just want to make sure we are getting the truth.
-
05-27-2016, 12:30 PM #2UnregisteredGuest
Oh mannnnn those are good questions!!! I can't believe it took this long for someone to ask them!!!!!
-
05-27-2016, 12:50 PM #3UnregisteredGuest
According to the Florida Sunshine Law (aka open records law), the Sarasota Sheriff's Office must comply with all open records requests. LOL I can't believe you're even asking this. However, that could present a very thorny issue for Mr. Tom Knight and his sidekick Herr Kurt Hoffman. LOLOLOL
If you are given any flak, then go visit Andrea Mogensen and explain to her what's going on. She won't take your case unless she knows she can win (most attorneys are that way).
Wow, those are good questions. The SSO doesn't own Facebook, but paid SSO media personnel maintain and update it. I think that Wendy Rose created it in the beginning, but I'm not 100% sure. She's gone now (she had a falling out with Knight, but who hasn't?). Since SSO Facebook is operated and maintained by paid SSO media personnel, then yes, I believe that it must comply with all open records requests. You know that Kurt Hoffman is reading this, so now he's going to try and somehow transfer SSO Facebook to be maintained by ______ (???) to get-out from under the open records laws. OMG!!!! What a freaking sticky thorny mess this could be!!!! Lee Williams from the H-T may also be interested in doing this research.
Hummmmm to answer your question: "Yes, paid SSO media personnel are in charge of deleting unfavorable comments on the SSO Facebook page." But now that Hoffman is aware of this sticky question, how is he going to try and weasel out of it (in order to not comply with an open records request)? Not sure yet...
Well, you're certainly opening up a can of worms with your questions. Florida's Sunshine Laws are extremely clear, so the only alternative for Mr. Tom Knight and Herr Kurt Hoffman is to either:
- Shut down SSO Facebook (if they don't want to comply with public records requests)
- Or somehow pawn-off ownership and maintenance of the SSO Facebook website to a non-paid non-governmental entity (if they don't want to comply with open records laws).
Kudos to your questions. LOL :-)
-
05-27-2016, 01:08 PM #4UnregisteredGuest
If the SSO Facebook page is operated by SSO employees (and it is), then is the website subject to Florida's Sunshine Laws -- or is it exempt from scrutiny and open records requests? The only 3 things that are exempt from open records requests are:
1. Active criminal investigations
2. Intelligence information
3. Medical issues
Nothing that is posted at the SSO Facebook page falls under any of those three categories. So to answer your question, I cannot think of a legal reason that authorizes civilian SSO media personnel to block citizens from reading or posting at the website (unless they are violating Facebook rules?).
-
05-27-2016, 01:15 PM #5UnregisteredGuest
i cannot think of a legal authorization, unless the website is exclusively a privately run business (and not operated, updated and maintained by government employees). This is ultimately going to get the attention of sarasota county's commissioners (and the county attorney too). When the commissioners discuss this public issue, it better not be done in secret with sheriff tom knight. It is legally a public issue.
-
05-27-2016, 01:40 PM #6“Hatred” v. “Contempt”Guest
To the clueless idiots on the 2nd floor who say it’s a question of “hatred” against the current sheriff (Tom Knight): You’re totally and absolutely wrong.
Most deputies and civilian SSO employees don’t hate Tom Knight, Kurt Hoffman and their bright-eyed and bushy tailed 2nd floor appointed henchmen. SSO employees hate the daily, weekly, monthly and yearly dishonesty and immorality from Knight and his hand-picked administration. The word “hate” is inaccurate. Please try the word “contempt.” SSO deputies and employees are contemptuous. It’s very clear to everyone except, of course, to the appointed 2nd floor henchmen.
-
05-27-2016, 02:14 PM #7UnregisteredGuest
-
05-27-2016, 07:48 PM #8UnregisteredGuest
-
05-28-2016, 03:33 AM #9UnregisteredGuest
anyone notice they call SSO--"SCSO" on the facebook? since when has anyone ever said that??
is the "SSO" acronym tainted in the mind of the second floor??
-
05-28-2016, 10:14 AM #10UnregisteredGuest
Bookmarks