This site & the MOD

I posted the list of contributors to Coats campaign on the PCSO, Largo, St Pete and Clearwater sites. The MOD decided to remove the posts because he said they contain addresses of retired LEO's.
First of all, this information is posted on the Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections web site. It is the responsibility of the treasurer of Coats campaign to remove these addresses. I did it because people have the right to know. The MOD's censor what THEY BELIEVE should and should not be on this site. With all the negative rhetoric on LEO Affairs, I post something important and it gets removed. If you are going to censor the posts that have merit and keep the ones that have no substance what so ever, than this site proves to be no different then the liberal St Pete Times. I believe you have no right to do this. You have proven this site is as ridiculous as people say. I read the terms of LEO Affairs and I did not violate them at all. YOU, MOD need to remain impartial.
I URGE YOU ALL TO GO TO www.pinellascounty.org and click on the supervisor web site. Check these contributors and know who they are. As for retired LEO's, I think you are wrong.
People have the right to know and you are censoring information.

http://www.votepinellas.com

sensorship alive and well here....seems like everyones running scared because of Delcookoo's rantings of CIA and the likes investigations...if its already on another site then LEO is off the hook

check out 362 and 363 on who gave money to Coats. Was it really worth the cpl stripes bro?

http://www.votepinellas.com/index.php?op=F&ss=108034

[MOD 1]

I posted the list of contributors to Coats campaign on the PCSO, Largo, St Pete and Clearwater sites. The MOD decided to remove the posts because he said they contain addresses of retired LEO's.
First of all, this information is posted on the Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections web site. It is the responsibility of the treasurer of Coats campaign to remove these addresses. I did it because people have the right to know. The MOD's censor what THEY BELIEVE should and should not be on this site. With all the negative rhetoric on LEO Affairs, I post something important and it gets removed. If you are going to censor the posts that have merit and keep the ones that have no substance what so ever, than this site proves to be no different then the liberal St Pete Times. I believe you have no right to do this. You have proven this site is as ridiculous as people say. I read the terms of LEO Affairs and I did not violate them at all. YOU, MOD need to remain impartial.
I URGE YOU ALL TO GO TO www.pinellascounty.org and click on the supervisor web site. Check these contributors and know who they are. As for retired LEO's, I think you are wrong.
People have the right to know and you are censoring information.

I had warned you previously not to post the list with any Active or Former LEO's Addresses on it. This includes family member's of LEOs. This is prohibited by FSS 119.071. I don't make the law.

I found the address of at least 1 active LEO, 1 Retired LEO and the addresses of some probable family members. That was just by going through the very first part of the list. I'm not going to take my time to go all the way through the list when I see addresses near the beginning that violate FSS 119.071.

It's not my fault if it's posted on the Supervisor of Elections web site. I know it is, I saw it there. It's not my fault that some candidates listed addresses as exempt and some didn't.

If you want to post the list here, it will be best to remove all of the individual's addresses to avoid the possibility of violating FS119.071. You can't trust that just because someone is listed as an occupation as something other than Law Enforcement that they are not Law Enforcement or a Law Enforcement Family Member. I reviewed enough of the list to know.

Honestly I don't care if you list the names, just don't list the addresses that violate FSS 119.071, that is violating the Terms of Use, even if it isn't spelled out. Honestly, it shouldn't have to be spelled out for you that if it violates FSS 119.071 that it violates the Terms of Use, but it will definitely be spelled out for you in the next version of the Terms of Use.

Mod 1

Than I guess you just discovered that the Pinellas County Sheriff, Jim Coats, just violated Florida Statue 119.071
He quite blatantly listed the addresses to not only retired, as you say, but also current LEO's.
I am still trying to understand why you care so much, yet the current Sheriff and the Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections, does not?

I will no longer post the list on this site. Hopefully, the LEO's on this site will stay informed via the elections site. I am truly concerned about the perception of impropriety I see with some of the contributors. This Sheriff continues to ride the money train and lacks accountability.
The public has a right to know how these individuals play a role in the political process of this candidate.

When the elected Sheriff drafts a letter of character reference for the CEO of Ditech on Sheriff letterhead, after a DUI arrest, it brings discredit to the office. Public confidence is compromised. We represent law and order and MUST remain impartial. If you look at ALL the candidates running for all offices across the county, it chills me to see the one person who MUST and should remain impartial, seems to have the largest warchest of money. If that doesnt send the aroma of improproriety, I dont know what else does. There are rumors floating around that some of Coats past indiscretions are going to come out, closer to the November election. Maybe that is why Fowler left so quickly?
For the sake of the office, I hope I am wrong. Theres an old saying, "where theres smoke, theres fire."

I don't agree with Intel (as I don't believe it should be posted) and I'm not an attorney, but if you actually read FSS 119.071; it really doesn't state that posting that info is a violation of law. FSS 119.071 states that it is information that cannot be released as a government public record and provides exemptions. Just a side note, but I'd be willing to bet there is a whole bunch of LEO's in the phone book too...should we arrest Ma Bell?

One other side note: After reviewing some of the campaign contributions, it is rather interested to see who gave what and when (like when they contributed and when they were hired for the agency maybe?). It's also interesting that so many developers, construction companies and out of state companies contributed. Why the big interest from these groups? Just wondering.

[MOD 488]

Here's my take on this:

Whether it's legal or not, it's not right to post (or repost) the address of current or former LEOs.

We have no control over what a cadidate or the Supervisor of Elections does with thier website.

We do have control over this website, and have warned the poster about this before.

Enough said.