New posts

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
Mine is my real name. I have said what I believe in a respectful manner. I do understand why some use pseudonyms but at the same time I think part of the problem with hiding behind one is you are personally NOT ACCOUNTABLE FOR YOUR WORDS. I could say and do some outrageous things behind a mask. I may not be as polite behind a screen name and I think that is part of the issue here. Just my opinion.
Bob, do you really understand? Have you seen the vitriol and the intentional altercations that the beachfront owners the Goodwins have endured? The Goodwins even prevailed in court to protect their property rights. If you believe all the lies about Huckabee I have beachfront for $400 to sell you. Have you read the anti-social media and misinformation about beachfront property owners?

I'll say it again why would any beachfront property owner want to be subjected lies and anti-social media just because they own private beach property? I'm one of the 650+ owners intervening in Walton's CU of private property litigation.

I think your point is well taken for CU of private property advocates who do not have any real-property skin in the game and support of the social media masses.

GUEST COLUMN: Walton County couple speaks up for property owners' First Amendment rights
First Amendment & Property Rights Violation in Florida -- Forbes Article | National Review
Countering Public Officials Who Respect Neither Free Speech Nor Property Rights
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bob bob

Beach Fanatic
Mar 29, 2017
513
262
SRB
Are you referring to Lake View Too, bob bob, poppaj, Dawn, EZ4144, MRBS, Duchess, Jenksy, L.C. Bane, mputnal, buster, Leader of the Banned, Emerald Drifter, ShallowsNole, or jodiFL on this thread? How do you know Jim Tucker, James Bentwood, Pam Hicks are not pseudonyms? They are not in the Walton tax rolls used to look up Reggie Gaskins
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

Besides who would want to subject themselves to the CU anti-social media vitriol like with James Linch and many others and staged beach altercations like at Vizcaya and other private properties?
So scary you are. Keep up the great research. :rolleyes:
There sure are a lot of silent accounts since gaskins was banned. Hmmmmm :banned:
#sockpuppets
 

Bob Wells

Beach Fanatic
Jul 25, 2008
3,472
1,439
Bob, do you really understand? Have you seen the vitriol and the intentional altercations that the beachfront owners the Goodwins have endured? The Goodwins even prevailed in court to protect their property rights. If you believe all the lies about Huckabee I have beachfront for $400 to sell you. Have you read the anti-social media and misinformation about beachfront property owners? I'll say it again why would any beachfront property owner want to be subjected lies and anti-social media just because they own private beach property? I'm one of the 650+ owners intervening in Walton's CU of private property litigation.

GUEST COLUMN: Walton County couple speaks up for property owners' First Amendment rights
First Amendment & Property Rights Violation in Florida -- Forbes Article | National Review
Countering Public Officials Who Respect Neither Free Speech Nor Property Rights
And because I expressed my view under my own name we have deflected as to why some on both sides won't put their name to something. Kind of hard to own your words when we won't put our name on them. You brought up the Goodwins, who I have met and have respect for. Although I may disagree with them I won't trash them for their views. The arguements here have not changed my mind and I have made clear that the courts will decide the issue. I believe because of the screen names it is easier to be inhospitable than being friendly. Although not a fan of Mr Lince he at least owns his words because if I am correct he uses his real name, I can respectfully disagree with him.
 

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
And because I expressed my view under my own name we have deflected as to why some on both sides won't put their name to something. Kind of hard to own your words when we won't put our name on them. You brought up the Goodwins, who I have met and have respect for. Although I may disagree with them I won't trash them for their views. The arguements here have not changed my mind and I have made clear that the courts will decide the issue. I believe because of the screen names it is easier to be inhospitable than being friendly. Although not a fan of Mr Lince he at least owns his words because if I am correct he uses his real name, I can respectfully disagree with him.
You are one of the very few exceptions on-line of advocates for public customary use of private property who are respectful. Thank you Bob Wells.

I'd still be interested in a civil discourse somewhere else on what basis; legal, just believe it, or other, you advocate for public customary use of private property.
 

Reggie Gaskins

Beach Lover
Oct 4, 2018
153
259
58
Blue Mountain Beach
That's hilarious; good point JodiFL. Here you have the same 6 or 8 people talking in circles in this echo chamber of a thread. 20,000 views. Ha ha. Estimate 19,700 are of them reading their own stuff and replying to their own stuff. I would not exactly call this a "high engagement" thread by any stretch of the imagination. Reminds me of someone with 42 twitter followers. Where are the 6500 adoring fans representing and appreciating the viewpoints expressed? Another echo chamber there as well. "Just a handful."

Dave, your online posturing is great for the masses. Those that think for themselves understand the manipulation involved in your masked and feigned worry about identities. FBFA and Divisioning followers attack persons into shadows by contacting their employers, customers, neighbors, and family to torch their personal life. It’s happened now a dozen times. Reggie is a perfect example. You couldn’t argue with his logic. You couldn’t embarrass him in his home. So y’all silenced the most prolific poster of Sowal by banning his truth from the very page that Sowal collects ad revenue increase from by his hand. Brilliant display of honest conversation. Not very much. Let us in the community know when you’re ready to have a conversation to support your CU ideas withOUT diversions of irrelevance as you’ve repeated here. Come with facts please.

I've personally known Reggie for years and he's not James Lince.
If you knew him personally like I do, you would truly ashamed for a banning him! Reggie is as upstanding as they come.

P.S.
And by the way, if anyone wants to refute Dave on is 10 to 12 people number, remind him he predicted only 30 owners would defend the lawsuit against them. When in fact there are well over 1000 individual homeowners defending their property against the attack by the county. So his predictive power leaves a little bit to be desired based on his historical performance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BeachSandpiper

Beach Comber
May 3, 2019
21
12
60
South Walton
So scary you are. Keep up the great research. :rolleyes:
There sure are a lot of silent accounts since gaskins was banned. Hmmmmm :banned:
#sockpuppets
Ok, so I am new to this forum and how it works. I don't understand why Gaskins was banned for stating his opinions like everyone else on this thread. And I really don't understand why there is a problem with anonymous names since the majority of people seem to use them. Can someone please tell me what Gaskins did to qualify for banning? Alot of people here have bashed others, called people names, but yet they are still here commenting. Do you have to be in a special group to have protection from being banned? Just asking so I know if this is really a forum for me. PS I may not comment, but I do read the thread. So just because people are silent, it doesn't mean we aren't here reading and learning from the discussion.
 

Dave Rauschkolb

Beach Fanatic
Jul 13, 2005
1,006
790
Santa Rosa Beach
Bob, do you really understand? Have you seen the vitriol and the intentional altercations that the beachfront owners the Goodwins have endured? The Goodwins even prevailed in court to protect their property rights. If you believe all the lies about Huckabee I have beachfront for $400 to sell you. Have you read the anti-social media and misinformation about beachfront property owners?

I'll say it again why would any beachfront property owner want to be subjected lies and anti-social media just because they own private beach property? I'm one of the 650+ owners intervening in Walton's CU of private property litigation.

I think your point is well taken for CU of private property advocates who do not have any real-property skin in the game and support of the social media masses.

GUEST COLUMN: Walton County couple speaks up for property owners' First Amendment rights
First Amendment & Property Rights Violation in Florida -- Forbes Article | National Review
Countering Public Officials Who Respect Neither Free Speech Nor Property Rights


It is absolutely ridiculous for anyone to assert or imply that any of the vitriol directed at any beachfront owner is coming from me or the board members of FBFA. To imply that you people are hiding behind pseudonyms because you’re worried about something that I am doing or may do is outrageous. The conspiracy theories abound here and elsewhere. I do not lie nor do I tolerate liars. To imply that we are staging conflicts is also ludicrous. I can't control any person who verbally attacks Beachfront Owners in any social media platform, forum or on the beach. And Fishing Fool, or whatever your name is, I have had zero to do with anyone being banned in the 18 years I have been on this forum.

My position is of what most people's opinion is on this issue and that is to say the beaches are public use and they always have been regardless of "owned sand." The volumes of conjecture and analysis is impressive on this forum to dispute that but in the end our beaches will be public use or they will not. Two differing opinions; it distills down to that one issue.

I choose not to engage with anonymous people who attack me because I prefer to give all of you the least amount of material you will invariably use to try to twist and turn against me and our efforts. I operate in the realm of respect. Those who disrespect me get very little response or respect in return; I don't resort to nastiness I just turn my back to you and focus my good energies on the task at hand.

One thing I will tell you all. We will not be intimidated by anyone and we will continue our efforts to ensure the beachgoing public may use every grain of sand on our beaches. We will continue to educate anyone and everyone willing to hear the story of what has brought us to this travesty playing out daily on our beaches. By Judge or by a vote of Floridians we will see this through to the public's shared use of the sand for all. And this goes way, way beyond me and our community. Leaders are being woken up to this all over our Nation. For Beach Front Owners to have the audacity to claim any of our shared, Nation's beach borders are private and may exclude the public is simply wrong on too many levels to count.

Every word I have written in numerous published articles I stand by. My positions are clear and there for all to see in my own hand and in my own name. Property values near the beaches are higher because of their close proximity to the beach. Beachfront owners pay for the view and convenience of having the water steps from their homes. Homes closer but not on the beach have little less value because of the convenience of having the water and beach a short walk from their homes. Homes that require a short drive are less valuable for that reason and homes that require a longer drive are worth less. So, values both quality of life and financial values are tied directly to the shared beach and those homes closest to the beach. Shared is the operative word and beach is THE place that determines value on all levels. That is to say balance and shared value for all. Beachfront owners have the advantage of view and the closest proximity. So, if the real issue is behavior let's work together to reign in the behavior, set some rules and begin sharing the beaches again; all of the beaches again from dune line to water line. If that is the compromise then that is the only compromise I can see. Fix the behavior and share the beaches. I am full of ideas. But once you start talking property rights and applying them to a beach and excluding people from that beach you have lost me. Any takers?
 
Last edited:

Auburn Fan

Beach Lover
Oct 4, 2018
82
67
Auburn
So scary you are. Keep up the great research. :rolleyes:
There sure are a lot of silent accounts since gaskins was banned. Hmmmmm :banned:
#sockpuppets

Reggie was banned?!!!!???

Does he even know?

How did you and Lakeview Two find out?

Why was he banned?

What rule did he break?

Surely that was not an easy decision for the administrators to make, considering the thousands of extra views he could have brought in over the years, views are necessary to attract the advertisers.
 

Auburn Fan

Beach Lover
Oct 4, 2018
82
67
Auburn
"The handful of influential beachfront owners stopping beach nourishment was the beginning of the end of customary use. This was the first step in their plan to deny us the use of our beaches."
Dave Rauschkolb June 5, 2019


"I've made a good argument against re-nourisment in the Sun, it's a waste of time and money and in the end our beaches will never be the same" -
David Rauschkolb May 7, 2015

"I wholeheartedly agree Dr. Leatherman!!"
Dave Rauschkolb May 7, 2015


Direct quotes from Dr. Leatherman's study:

The irony in this misguided Walton County project is that under the guise of strengthening, widening or nourishing area beaches, this plan would have the actual effect of eroding its spectacular beauty, timeless appeal and inherent economic value.

My findings lead to the conclusion that the project is misguided, counterproductive and harmful to the matchless nature of the sugar-white sand that makes these beaches so outstanding.”

It is my professional opinion that the nourishment project would be harmful to Walton County’s most alluring resource – its magnificent beaches.”
 

Dave Rauschkolb

Beach Fanatic
Jul 13, 2005
1,006
790
Santa Rosa Beach
"The handful of influential beachfront owners stopping beach nourishment was the beginning of the end of customary use. This was the first step in their plan to deny us the use of our beaches."
Dave Rauschkolb June 5, 2019


"I've made a good argument against re-nourisment in the Sun, it's a waste of time and money and in the end our beaches will never be the same" -
David Rauschkolb May 7, 2015

"I wholeheartedly agree Dr. Leatherman!!"
Dave Rauschkolb May 7, 2015


Direct quotes from Dr. Leatherman's study:

The irony in this misguided Walton County project is that under the guise of strengthening, widening or nourishing area beaches, this plan would have the actual effect of eroding its spectacular beauty, timeless appeal and inherent economic value.

My findings lead to the conclusion that the project is misguided, counterproductive and harmful to the matchless nature of the sugar-white sand that makes these beaches so outstanding.”

It is my professional opinion that the nourishment project would be harmful to Walton County’s most alluring resource – its magnificent beaches.”


My beliefs on beach nourishment is well documented and my reasons were that the sand quality would not be the same and for the environment and I did not think it works. The plan played out by beachfront owners had everything to do with securing private beaches. I never imagined they would ever succeed. And stopping beach nourishment WAS indeed the first step in their plan to deny the use of our beaches. There I said it again and I will say it again if you wish. Happy to connect the dots all they way to the beginning.
 
New posts