The Truth About Ruth - Part 2 - Merge

[Mustang Sally]

I don't think her actual identity matters, nor will we ever find out.

I agree with most of what you said, and I think the possibilities you lay out are excellent. But I do have a little doubt about this last statement - like anyone who is (possibly) an emotional/financial con-artist online, I think it is actually important to find out who they are, even though it is very difficult to do so. At the very least, it would be nice to find out if the same false identity or stories with very similar elements have popped up elsewhere online and been used for financial gain or attention.

I'm not sure what I'm trying to say, but maybe this: we may never find out who "Ruth" actually is, but it's not impossible to do so - similar scams have been tracked down to real identities recently. If it's possible, I think it would be a good thing to figure out who is behind it, IF it is a scam of some sort. So I guess what I'm saying is that I do think it matters. It might prevent at least a little bit of scamming in the future, or cause the person behind it to possibly seek help.

That said, we still don't have positive proof that this is a scam, just a bunch of troubling inconsistencies - most importantly OfDuggar's story of being pregnant and having a child, and then linking to the Razing Ruth blog - that are suggestive of something fishy. I would still like to find out more if at all possible.

[Lillybee]

There are many ways to hide your IP address. Just do a quick Google to find them.

[happy atheist]

Subbing to new thread so I can find it.

?

[vetrik]

[redacted]

This is an interesting thread. I've been following her since TWOP, and like many, I've waffled on believing her over the years, leaning towards mostly believing. I've never commented on the blog or given money, so I didn't have that personal vested interest in how much was true, I just found it an interesting story.

If it's made up, these long term scams always amaze me. That is a lot of time and effort committed to the keeping up the story...all those years of blogging, posting, lying. Ruth was smart though, keeping it just low-key enough for years to keep stringing people along. She never went whole hog with posting constantly, ads on the blog, or asking for donations or money. She had the perfect story to cover for not releasing identifying information. I wonder how much she did make over the years.

[NurseNell]

?

You have to make a post, then choose at the bottom "notify me when a reply is posted". At least that's what I think she means by subbing.

[VaSportsMom]

?

I use Tapatalk and this thread doesn't show up in my participated threads so I wanted to make a quick post to get there. I suck at trying to navigate around on my phone and I have a little red headed niece running around with my iPad.

[NurseNell]

I use Tapatalk and this thread doesn't show up in my participated threads so I wanted to make a quick post to get there. I suck at trying to navigate around on my phone and I have a little red headed niece running around with my iPad.

Blame the red headed niece. Us red heads are always getting blamed. :giggle:

[happy atheist]

I use Tapatalk and this thread doesn't show up in my participated threads so I wanted to make a quick post to get there. I suck at trying to navigate around on my phone and I have a little red headed niece running around with my iPad.

Thanks for the explanation. I have never used Tapa.

[Mustang Sally]

This is an interesting thread. I've been following her since TWOP, and like many, I've waffled on believing her over the years, leaning towards mostly believing. I've never commented on the blog or given money, so I didn't have that personal vested interest in how much was true, I just found it an interesting story.

If it's made up, these long term scams always amaze me. That is a lot of time and effort committed to the keeping up the story...all those years of blogging, posting, lying. Ruth was smart though, keeping it just low-key enough for years to keep stringing people along. She never went whole hog with posting constantly, ads on the blog, or asking for donations or money. She had the perfect story to cover for not releasing identifying information. I wonder how much she did make over the years.

Agreed. I have watched lots and lots of online scams come and go - from Kaycee Nicole to...God, I can't even name them all off the top of my head. But I linked to the Piece of Fakey blog earlier, that was the Janna St. James scam, and then there was Eli Warrior Warrior Eli really recently. And then I just watched the documentary The Woman Who Wasn't There the other day, about a woman named "Tania Head" who claimed to be a 9/11 survivor, and even headed an organization to help survivors before being found out - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alicia_Esteve_Head

The stupid part is I thought having followed all those stories would make it easier for me to notice a scam, but RR had an air of credibility, I'm sad to say, due to her participation on FJ. That's not the fault of the FJ admins, just one of the quirks of human psychology, to trust someone who seems "familiar" even if in reality you know nothing about them.

[nelliebelle1197]

Would anyone be offended if I sent this to Warrior Eli blog?

warriorelihoax.com/

[Mama Mia]

I just meant, if she knew the family, that I would be interested in her opinion. Obviously she can't verify whether a faker used their information, but if she knows the family then she will know details that match up or don't match up with "Ruth's" story that the rest of us may not have noticed.

General question for those who followed "Ruth's" blog more closely than I did - did she ever post any pictures either on her blog or on FJ?

But, giving her the benefit of doubt here, if this was her real family, and she was trying to keep her identity even marginally secret, wouldn't she change some of those details? For example ages and gender mix of her siblings, or saying Mom was the math teacher instead or dad? If she is mostly "real" she certainly cant give out the exactly correct identifying family info while keeping her identity hidden.

I'm not saying I think her story is true, but I know I change some of those kinds of details, and I know I'm a real person....and I don't have some whack job family either, I just don't necessarily want someone I know in real life stumbling across my opinions on sensitive issues, or worse, identifying themselves when I share family experiences.

Sorry for any grammar or spelling errors, not feeling well.

[Mustang Sally]

But, giving her the benefit of doubt here, if this was her real family, and she was trying to keep her identity even marginally secret, wouldn't she change some of those details? For example ages and gender mix of her siblings, or saying Mom was the math teacher instead or dad? If she is mostly "real" she certainly cant give out the exactly correct identifying family info while keeping her identity hidden.

I'm not saying I think her story is true, but I know I change some of those kinds of details, and I know I'm a real person....and I don't have some whack job family either, I just don't necessarily want someone I know in real life stumbling across my opinions on sensitive issues, or worse, identifying themselves when I share family experiences.

Sorry for any grammar or spelling errors, not feeling well.

I agree with you that that is a possibility. A couple of comments mentioned that as well. The biggest inconsistency, however, which I don't think can be accounted for with mere privacy concerns, were the OfDuggar post on TWOP saying that Ruth had given birth to a child - and OfDuggar identifying themselves as "Ruth" by linking to the blog. "Ruth" never subsequently denied that she was OfDuggar, which she should have done if she got a traffic influx from that post, and commenters mentioning that poster's name. That would be a pretty big "detail" to change in a bid for privacy, and never mention again, especially given that she already openly shared that detail on TWOP.

[TheJewAmongUs]

Would anyone be offended if I sent this to Warrior Eli blog?

warriorelihoax.com/

So Taryn can contact a bunch of news outlets and try to give more interviews? I wouldn't.

[VaSportsMom]

Blame the red headed niece. Us red heads are always getting blamed. :giggle:

I have 2 of them that I agreed to keep for a week before learning that there is a custody case on Fri. I'm in over my head with little girls (I have much older boys) but the iPad seems to amuse them to no end.

[Palimpsest]

I agree with most of what you said, and I think the possibilities you lay out are excellent. But I do have a little doubt about this last statement - like anyone who is (possibly) an emotional/financial con-artist online, I think it is actually important to find out who they are, even though it is very difficult to do so. At the very least, it would be nice to find out if the same false identity or stories with very similar elements have popped up elsewhere online and been used for financial gain or attention.

I'm not sure what I'm trying to say, but maybe this: we may never find out who "Ruth" actually is, but it's not impossible to do so - similar scams have been tracked down to real identities recently. If it's possible, I think it would be a good thing to figure out who is behind it, IF it is a scam of some sort. So I guess what I'm saying is that I do think it matters. It might prevent at least a little bit of scamming in the future, or cause the person behind it to possibly seek help.

That said, we still don't have positive proof that this is a scam, just a bunch of troubling inconsistencies - most importantly OfDuggar's story of being pregnant and having a child, and then linking to the Razing Ruth blog - that are suggestive of something fishy. I would still like to find out more if at all possible.

All very true. I have the Internet skilz of Winnie the Pooh so I'm stunned at what people can do legally and legitimately on the net to track people down. However, in the cases where people have been tracked down a lot of money has changed hands usually and it gets to criminal levels. I don't think RR is at that level.

I guess it is not important to me to find her real identity. I have the information I need now to alert to similar stories and express my concerns much earlier than I did here on any fora/blogs I frequent in the future.

Did you see my post back on page 2(?) of this thread where I semi-seriously speculated that RR will turn up on the Birth Mother and Adult Adopted Children sites for her next gig? As Razing Rachael whose baby was ripped from her loving arms and adopted under false pretenses? She'll need lots of money and emotional support to reunite with her child.

As an adult adopted child I occasionally look at those sites, just in case my natural mother ever surfaces. I doubt she will, but I sometimes look. I'll be watching for an RR scammer there now. See what I mean?

[frumper-rump]

Would anyone be offended if I sent this to Warrior Eli blog?

warriorelihoax.com/

I wonder if she (she = Warrior Eli Hoax lady) might be able to get to the bottom of this?

I used my lunch break to spped read and catch up on all of the recent posts and am left feeling really sad....and grateful that my credit card wouldn't process for some reason when I tried to donate a little money for RR's cross country "trip".

[Mustang Sally]

I guess it is not important to me to find her real identity. I have the information I need now to alert to similar stories and express my concerns much earlier than I did here on any fora/blogs I frequent in the future.

Did you see my post back on page 2(?) of this thread where I semi-seriously speculated that RR will turn up on the Birth Mother and Adult Adopted Children sites for her next gig? As Razing Rachael whose baby was ripped from her loving arms and adopted under false pretenses? She'll need lots of money and emotional support to reunite with her child.

As an adult adopted child I occasionally look at those sites, just in case my natural mother ever surfaces. I doubt she will, but I sometimes look. I'll be watching for an RR scammer there now. See what I mean?

Yes, I see what you mean. This has probably been a useful lesson to several people here, even if we never find out the truth. I think it's actually a good idea to keep your eyes open on other fora for similar activity.

[OkToBeTakei]

Totally fair not to just take what I say at face value. I do think the utter lack of interesting information I had to share might help my case, though. :lol:

Well you didn't ask for money. Always a plus in my book :lol:

[Mustang Sally]

I wonder if she (she = Warrior Eli Hoax lady) might be able to get to the bottom of this?

I used my lunch break to spped read and catch up on all of the recent posts and am left feeling really sad....and grateful that my credit card wouldn't process for some reason when I tried to donate a little money for RR's cross country "trip".

It sounds like she has a backlog and if anything, it would take a while. I don't see why people here couldn't do it. Some of us do have decent internet skillz (not to brag.)

I asked a question before but no one has answered it yet - Does someone who followed Ruth's postings more closely know if she ever posted a picture online anywhere? It obviously wouldn't show her face or any identifying details, but perhaps even just a shot of inside her home, or outside somewhere? It might be possible to identify if any pictures were stolen from other websites if she posted any.

On her Facebook, the only posted image I can see is this -

It looks like a generic desktop image or something. Anyone know?

Tineye.com gives over 6,000 matches for that photo, so it could be from anywhere.

[CallmeChaCha]

I read her entire blog last year (or within the past year) and I don't remember any pictures whatsoever, but I can't say I'm 100% certain there were no pictures. As for her FB, I think I remember reading somewhere (yuku?) where she said that's not her real FB and that she had another FB with her real name. This was when she announced her engagement. I can try to dig it up later when I have more time (and don't have to hide that I'm reading here while I should be working).

[copper]

Hmm, if RR was using the [redacted] family as inspiration/alluding that they were her family, I wonder if [redacted] comments on Recovering Grace looked like they may have become a problem for her.

In this post: recoveringgrace.org/2013/06/a-call-to-repentance/#more in the comments, a "Mary Ruth" made this comment:

"Mary Ruth June 7, 2013 Reply

Hmm... I was taught that in good etiquette, a man never should initiate a handshake with a girl! This is very old, and usually forgotten, but you see it even in the Jane Austin movies. A man can offer his hand to assist a girl, but a girl initiates the handshake. In my mind, Bill is vowing to do something on the same basic level as saying please when he asks for something!"

[redacted] is VERY active in commenting on this post. And while he defends Gothard, he does still seem to question and continually indicates his desire to find "the truth" His attitude and writing style seems different than Darth Daddy. Also, his posts within this thread clearly indicate that he does have sons working for Gothard.

If RR meant to imply that she was from the [redacted] family by planting the link to the Duggar picture, she'd have a problem with [redacted] comments. RR's announcement of DDaddy's death was May 9th. Alfred was also active then.

[Lainey]

I don't remember any pictures, either.

[Pearl]

I find it interesting how different details cause red flags to rise up in different people. For me, the fact that she doesn't have a support system even after all these years didn't raise a red flag because I still have difficulty making friends (even online - I'll try to become part of an online community and be hit with anxiety attacks and back off) even though I remarried. The flags went up for me when reading about her sister.

Her sister seemed to have left her father's home only because she got pregnant, not because she disagreed with the dogma and theology that she was being fed. YET, she adopts her child out to a lesbian couple even though she's only been out of the fundie environment a few months? This didn't ring true to me. Also, the father of her child signed off on the adoption to a lesbian couple (he seemed to still be involved in the ATI movement). Razing Ruth's blog seems to be known by her enemies, so the father of the baby didn't come forth when finding out that his offspring would be raised by the ebil gays? I don't know - it seemed fishy. But, I could see that it might be possible. However, after the birth Rachel conveniently goes back home and is married off to a widower. Has that actually happened in ATI circles? My fundamentalist denomination of choice wasn't ATI or Gothard, so I don't know.

Also, now that I think of it - why hasn't any of her past peers outed her? I find it odd that EVERYONE that knew her would keep silent. Why would Darth Daddy even comment on her blog? She was anonymous wasn't she - he should have just kept quiet and no one would have been the wiser.

I didn't realize that she was 29 - she read so much younger to me. I would only read her off and on after the first big drama regarding her identity. Wasn't someone who thought she was fake run off on rails at NLQ or here? I don't remember (my memory is fuzzy). I wonder how that poster feels about this information now.

[Mustang Sally]

I read her entire blog last year (or within the past year) and I don't remember any pictures whatsoever, but I can't say I'm 100% certain there were no pictures. As for her FB, I think I remember reading somewhere (yuku?) where she said that's not her real FB and that she had another FB with her real name. This was when she announced her engagement. I can try to dig it up later when I have more time (and don't have to hide that I'm reading here while I should be working).

Yes, the "Ruth Razing" FB looks like an anonymized, shell profile. I'm sure she has another one somewhere, under her actual name, whoever she is.

ETA: Putting the FB link here for posterity - facebook.com/ruth.razing

[Mustang Sally]

If RR meant to imply that she was from the [redacted] family by planting the link to the Duggar picture, she'd have a problem with Alfred's comments. RR's announcement of DDaddy's death was May 9th. Alfred was also active then.

That is true. How old was that comment linking to the Duggar photo? Was it from 2012? Maybe no one followed up on it so she got reckless with her story, figuring no one would search out that link. More likely, though, is the simpler explanation - that the [redacted] have no connection to the RR story.