It has taken me nearly two years to find this ridiculous post of yours and here is my response:

If I was still at the Independent I would supply a copy of the very diplomatic and mildly worded letter as proof to readers that it was in no way bullying. The email (forwarded to the email address that you regularly use to discuss your nudist activities - including poll fraud) simply stated that it appeared an FBA representative was active on a website used to arrange illegal sex acts at Point Impossible - the very beach he was publicly arguing was not conducive to such activity. You argued above that he was merely trying to stop the activity…well, why then did he include a photograph of himself as part of a profile that also included a description of his genitals and a list of what were apparently his favourite sex acts?

Yes, I did join the site in order to get to the bottom (pardon the pun) of how the gay cruising community was exploiting Point Impossible’s CO status for illegal public sex - a point that was well proven by the hundreds of posts referring to the area and the fact that its clothing optional status makes it “impossible to get caught” engaging in public buggery. As “Nudiebags” said, “journalists regularly go outside their comfort zone looking for stories”. And what a cracker of a story it was.

You claim I exposed your children to smut? Well, Anita Grigg, I’d suggest that your children should not have access to an email address that is used to a) brag about your illegal activities and b) used to incite immoral and deceiptful activities among the nudism movement. That’s right, Anita Grigg, I have done a little bit of internet research into yourself and have unearthed allegations that, like the people observed indecently and illegally having sex at Point Impossible, you are fond of illegal acts at beaches yourself. Not only that, you manipulate polls to support your cause and have been found to lie blatantly to fellow nudists.

I’d further point out that the material accidentally faxed to Cr Rose Hodge was in no way pornography, did not contain photographs and did not contain language that you wouldn’t find on television.

People might like to follow this link to find out more about the questionable antics of a strange woman: http://www.tropicsnude.com/FBA.html

Happy reading Anita Grigg.

Hamish

As webmaster I’m in the (un?)fortunate position of being on both sides of all discussions. When this site was created the intention was simply to be a distribution mechanism for all information relating to nudism in Victoria that we could get our hands on. Over time, as more people contributed content, it became a place to repost submissions we received (usually with very little editing, for good or bad).

When we were informed of the motion to revoke CO status at Pt Impossible, it gave us the push we needed to relaunch the site, open it up to all contributors, and act as a true center for information gathering and dissemination. In the vast majority of cases this means the posts on the site are a consolidation of the various views expressed on various forums and via emails we receive.

My point? I personally have only been contacted by a journalist once for comment (which I handed off to others who are happy to fill the role of media liaison). I was meant to meet a journalist actually on the beach only recently, but I got there too late and others had already spoken to her. So I’ve never actually been officially in contact with the media ever!! The views on this site are generally not of any one person (or me personally), but a mish mash of everyone’s contributions and thoughts. This does mean a wide variety of emotions will show through - some issues spark a bigger response than others.

I will discuss your point about contacting the Independent for Clean up Australia Day with the others, it is a good idea. We do appreciate your input - different views (good, bad, critical or otherwise) are good for greater understanding within and outside the nudist community. We’ll take your points onboard - as a minority community group sometimes everything seems like a battle!!

Thanks for contributing

PS Happy to continue the discussion off-line, email me at webmaster [at] fbanavic.org if you want to chat. And there was a specific reason I thought you were from the Independent, if you’re curious let me know!!

Thanks for your post, it’s good to have someone along from the media (the Independent?) to make a comment on the issue - the nudist community has always welcomed open and factual communication amongst all the interested parties, media included.

Unfortunately you seem to have deduced that the moderator of this site (me!) is the same person cited in the article you linked - John actually sat 2 seats across from me at the workshop, which means we are very much not the same person!! I was a representative of a different organisation, not FBA, although I am a supporter of the work of FBA nationally.

The point of this post was not to get stuck into the media, in fact the third paragraph makes reference to (and links) an article that we viewed as balanced (and kudos was given to Jane for doing so). The point of this post was that the we believed the article in question was clearly un-researched and presented as heavily biased, and did not do justice to either quality journalism nor the issue itself. This may not be the journalists fault (since Jane has done balanced pieces in the past), perhaps it happened during editing?

The nudist community has had its fair share of critics, stretching far back before the fight for this little stretch of sand. We’re happy to have open and reasonable discussions about the facts and realities, and our issue with the article was this it presented very little of either.

Quotes from 2 of the workshop attendees who both cited only one side of the argument does not seem to be balanced reporting. Mix that up with no verification of the statements made and it was felt that the article did not represent the reality of the situation. The “majority” thought CO status should be removed??? That would have been quickly refuted with an email to any of the other attendees (at least 4 of them could have been reached using the media email address on this site!!).

It’s unfortunate you saw this posting as an attack on the media, and specifically the Independent, as that was not the intention - contrary to what you might think, we do see a place for the media in representing issues like these to the wider community. But we are firm believers in the media maintaining issue independence, sticking to the facts, and verifying the content of articles before publication. And we don’t believe this article was a fair representation of both sides of the argument.

Feel free to post another comment, or drop us an email using the details on the contacts page. We really don’t mind what the papers report, as long as it is fair, balanced, and based on facts!! We don’t think that is too much to ask from the media.

Despite numerous attempts in the past, the “Independent” has never managed to print an accurate, balanced story regarding Pt Impossible.

Most of us now don’t bother returning their calls, because our statements are always either ignored or mis-reported.

Thank Goodness none of the local community takes this fish and chip wrapper seriously!

Rob