My Two Cents on the Rules in the Wake of Garamet's Ban

Take em for what it's worth (and move this thread somewhere more appropriate if you'd like)

I'm a little bugged by them.

As I understand it, the rules are that you can't post real-life information on a poster unless they reveal it themselves first here or it's available through a published media outlet like a book or the L.A. Times.

First of all, it seems like it's unfair to people like Garamet (or frankly, me) or others who happened to have had things published. If I'm clever enough to figure out, say, a published screenplay, I should be able to use his personal information because it's been published, but I can't do the same if I figure out where some other random poster works?

Second, I don't understand the distinction between being published somewhere in print and being published online -- particularly if the person voluntarily published the information.

If someone posts information about themselves on another forum, a Facebook page, or whatever, why should that be "protected" but information posted at the NYT be fair game?

My gut reaction is it'd be best to either say "Only things put on WF are fair game" or "Everything's generally fair game, but the management reserves the right to act if things get out of control."

 

You're not quite getting the distinction. The vast majority of us have NO idea what name you publish under, since you haven't to my knowledge shared that information with us, so what you publish isn't exactly considered public here.

Garamet, on the other hand, made her name and her work VERY public here.

Basically, until *you* actually expose yourself as being an actual major reporter here on WF, your publish works may be used, but they can't be associated with you or your RL identity.


Or something like that.

 

Published media like articles, books, magazines, movies are posted online specifically to be seen and discussed.

 

Unless someone says explicitly here at Wordforge:

"Hi, I'm Paladin, but my real name is Joe Blow and I live in Timbuktu"*

there's is no connection between Paladin and Joe Blow that anyone reading here would gather. The presumption should always be that people want to keep it that way unless they choose to do otherwise.

Now, Raoul, if you really want to reveal to Wordforge that you're Elmore Leonard (), that's fine. But if you don't give your name here, it should remain secret. It doesn't matter that you published something somewhere else because there's nothing to tie 'Raoul the Red Shirt' to 'Elmore Leonard.' Of course, if you've posted on elmoreleonard.com that you frequent bulletin boards under the name 'Raoul the Red Shirt,' you do that with the knowledge you're making that information available to people who might want to find it, but that's your own affair.

Now, some people carry their Wordforge personas to other sites. If Googled and investigated one might indeed find a Wordforge posters' real name. Such is the power of the web; but you shouldn't reveal that information. Just because someone's identity can be determined, that isn't--and shouldn't be--carte blanche to reveal it to the world. With enough effort, anything can probably be determined nowadays.

Garamet was known by her real name here; it was no secret and, indeed, it's actually been a source of appeal for the website. She's invited people here to visit her personal website and there's a wealth of information about her there. There's no secrets and she does not comport herself in any way that suggests she wants to hide the aspects of her real identity that she herself has made available.

Until someone clearly states their personal information on this board, it should not be posted by others even if it can be found elsewhere. Not only is it against the rules. But it's seriously un-cool, in my opinion.


*no, my name is not really 'Joe Blow' nor do I live in Timbuktu. As far as I know, Raoul is not really Elmore Leonard, either. But if he is, I want an autographed copy of 'Rum Punch' to remain silent on the matter.

 

See, that's the thing...we aren't going to know who you are unless you say. Now if someone sussed out who you were somehow, and found your work and posted it here and said "Hey! This is Raoul!" thus revealing your real name before you have, personally, I would see this as a violation of the rule and the spirit of the rule.

 

EDIT, since Tamar and Paladin said it better than I could.

I did want to respond to this, though:

Good point. If someone's that big an assclown, you'll have more than enough ammo on this board to shoot 'em down with without the aid of Google, Facebook, ect. I don't see much appeal to hunting down stuff to use against someone, and the name troll with Marge/Maraget gets a 2 on the scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being Face's "I'm Glad She's Dead" comment.

 

OK, let's make it less about me per se.

In the course of posting, people reveal certain things about themselves.

That stuff (plus Googling or other searching) can hypothetically be used to figure out where someone's real name is and where they work.

As I understand the rules, if someone is in publishing, someone can say, "Lookee lookee, Poster X is really Joe Blow, as I've found this article that he wrote."

If someone is in another field, you cannot.

Either that, or this whole exception is basically about Garamet.

So are things like MySpace pages, reviews, things on other message boards, etc.

I don't understand the distinction.

Let's say I were Elmore Leonard and I was foolish enough to be reasonably honest here, without going to the Garamet extreme of being completely out-of-the closet.

In the course of discussion, saying I live in such and such, I write mystery novels, there are enough clues that someone on a mission could put 2+2+X together and come up with Elmore Leonard. It bothers me that, as I (mis)understand the rules, people could come after me as Elmore Leonard, but not, say, Face if one wanted to bother to find a recent law school grad based in central Cali who works in criminal defense.

Agreed.

But as I (mis)understand the rules, someone could reveal it if the person happened to be in publishing, or if they were quoted in a newspaper. They could not if the person were featured on a MySpace page or whatever. I don't understand the rationale behind the distinction.

 

Don't be a fucktard, and people won't come after you. .

Raoul is cool. I can't see anyone ever going after him.

 

If someone reveals your identity that way, they would still be in trouble. (IMO...Elwood may have a different take)

Using the Elmore example.

Someone posts some information about Elmore, they would not be in trouble.

If they post information about Elmore and go "Hey!! This guy is Raoul!!" and you have not already revealed that yourself, then they are in trouble.

Garamet wants to have it both ways...she wants to reveal her name when she wants traffic on her site or to promote something and then be able to pick and choose who uses her name and who does not. She revealed her name here and thus it is "fair game".

Another example:

Say I won the lottery.

If bryce posts a thread "Maine Woman wins Lottery" and comments on "Wow, she won $700,000,000! Damn!" this is not a problem, despite the fact my full name is there for all to see.

If Diacanu posts the same article and comments "HOLY SHIT!! Congratulations Tamar!!! Wanna buy me a Hembug? " well..now there is a problem because I haven't shared my last name with the board myself.

I can't expect to tell the board..."Hey! I won the lottery Saturday! Tracie XXXXXX" is one lucky bitch!" and then expect my name to be protected afterwards.

See where I am coming from?

 

You are over thinking the distinction here, it's not based on random rules like where you have been published, it is on if your name is already being treated by you as public information.

You could have a hundred novels out and if you weren't making them public knowledge here at Wordforge and trying to keep your identity secret that would be respected. The distinction comes when you come here and state your real identity with no attempt to hide it.

Ie the fact you have published something doesn't alter how the rules treat you, if however you came into the board and were very upfront about saying "I wrote X which was published in Y" and used your identity a lot of times as supporting evidence for your arguments or anecdotes then it would be quite evident that you are not trying to keep your identity private from anyone.

 

You guys destroyed my last loophole.

 

Clues wouldn't identify you (or Face) in and of themselves; "I am X" identifies you. Yes, someone could put it together and perhaps easily if you give the right information. But that doesn't mean you've chosen to make your real identity public. And so long as you haven't, posters here should respect that.

I think that's a pretty simple rule to abide. If you don't see someone's name being used here (without issue) or haven't read a post where they announce it, you should refrain from using it, no matter how easy it was for you to find.

The rule doesn't revolve around whether someone is in publishing or was quoted in a newspaper. No one here can control what happens at other sites. And everyone's identity is probably, in principle, discoverable by use of Internet reources. But posters here should not use a person's personal information unless that person has stated HERE (or implied by their actions) that it is okay to do so.

 

*sigh* I can't take the lies and hiding any more. I am actually the ghost of Hunter S. Thompson. Go ahead. Get out a copy of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas". If you circle every 69th letter, it spells out "Volpone".

 

So I can't mention, how, I have hard evidence that Paladin is really THE Spiderman!?

Damn. I was gonna ask him for tips or costume making!

 

Tip 1: Don't ask Tony Stark to be your tailor.

 

I thought it was every 23rd letter!?

Oh well, I am really Jim Morrison.

It's true, I didn't die.

I just can't live this lie any longer, it's eating me and Amelia (aka "Tamar" to you all) up. She never flies anymore, and she used to love that, even after that alien abduction...

Hell, every since that day Adolph "J. Allen" Hitler and were Leon "Henry Hill" Trotsky were on the grassy knoll, they've had issues. Now they've stopped their work at Area 51 on antigravity and cataloging the ol' records of the "Moon landings"...they won't even talk to Jimmy "Lethe" Hoffa, or visit little Charles Lindburg "Marso" Junior anymore...

Elvis "Uncle Albert" and Howie "Volpone" ("The Flying Fox") Hughes, and D.B. "Elwood" Cooper just all mope around now themselves as well.

This isn't at all what Andy "teh baba" Kaufman and Madeline Murry "TKO" O'Hare promised us it would be like...

I'm complaining to Lt. "Tupac" Mewa about it first thing when he gets back from killing Chavez.

*sigh*

 

That sort of works for garamet, Raoul or myself re: published texts, as long as WFers are considered too stupid to resort to a bit of inspired googling.

But I don't see at all how it applies to the issue about KIRK's real name. Apparently, if he posts it on Trekbbs, it's off limits here, but if he had posted it on WF, we could use it. But what someone posts at Trekbbs is more likely to be common knowledge on WF than something in the NYT, and it establishes a direct connection to the specific poster. That rule seems completely arbitrary.

 

My real name is Buster Hymen.

 

I'm sure I've said enough for everyone here to know who I am and where I live.

I did a Google search with some random info I've posted, and I ran into me.

I don't mind, since whoever finds that can't post my name or address - I haven't told y'all, so it's not fair game.

 

I reject the argument that his posting his picture at TBBS would be common knowledge. I didn't know. Lot's of other members on this board didn't and don't know.

I've never seen it nor have many others seen it. In fact I'd go as far as saying only a handful of people have seen it.

The rule is simple:

You don't post or discuss private information about a poster unless that poster themselves has revealed that information on Wordforge previously or has put their name out in the media making it impossible to not know their name.

Kirk did not ever reveal his name or that alleged picture on this board. Therefore you may not use his name on this board.

Garamet did reveal her name on this board. You may use her name.

T'Bonz did not reveal her name on this board but she gave an interview to a public newspaper telling said paper her name and her board name. She became through her own actions a public figure. You may use her name.

It's not arbitrary nor is it hard to understand.

 

Yeah, this politically inspired intentional obtuseness is just so much more fodder,

It's easy as hell to understand. Garamet and Aurora were unable to NOT troll Kirk and Peter back. Yes, constantly using Garamet's real life name was a troll. But it was a LEGAL troll. Posting non-public figures information back is OF COURSE a warnable offense. Always has been, always will be.

This is all amazingly transparent.

It's a beautiful troll though. Getting Aurora and Garamet to get themselves banned just by calling Garamet by her name, which she identified to the board from the very beginning? LOL.

Talk about getting under some one's skin.

And talk about 5th grade mentalities. All Garamet had to do was ignore the fact they were using her real name, because she gave them the right to. And the board admins signed off on that a long time ago.

You'd think that would be easy, wouldn't you?

As far as the Raoul's strawman about this discriminating against 'published' people, clearly that's not right. It's only people that self-identified what they published.

For example, Jeff Cooper Disciple's status as a porn scriptwriter icon is quite safe.

So just another transparent ploy that doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

That right there sums it all up....especially the Garamet legal defense force.

 

Elwood,

I think that exact sentence should be added to the rules here. It's the essence of the rule.


Sincerely,

Max Girth

 

Just to clarify, this isn't a "Free Garamet" effort.

From what I understand of what she did, she earned at least a temporary ban.

She'll be back, or not, and I know that nothing I'm going to ask or say here is going to speed or affect that in any way.

My opening this thread is about what I see as a nonsensical double standard, one that still, frankly, hasn't been explained.

I thought the rule was simply put that anybody's public information that they've not chosen to share with someone is off-limits. Fine, and fair enough.

Because of Garamet's situation, though, I saw Elwood post that the staff has carved out an exception: if you are published and someone has found out your name, you're out of luck.

I don't know how that exception works, or why it exists.

If it works like I think it does, if someone used information that a published person has put on here to figure out the identity of someone quoted in a newspaper, or who works for one, a troll could use it.

I have a vested interest in this as I've talked about writing for newspapers. I think that if someone wanted to use some time and effort, they could find out who I am based on things I've posted here.

And actually, by the same token, I wouldn't be surprised if someone who wanted to put the effort into trying to figure out JCD's identity, assuming he's been telling the truth, could do so. How many porn/real screen writers are there in W. Va? Someone dedicated could use information that shootER has put up to figure out who he is, assuming he has been telling the truth. And so on.

Or someone could find out through sneaky means and attempt to justify their use of the person's info through, "Well they were semipublic anyway, because they worked for X or published Y in the mainstream media."

I've admitted all along that I might be wrong about how that works. I hope so. And Tamar has indicated that she thought so.

The second point is I don't understand why someone who gets outed by being in the L.A. Times by policy should get treated differently than someone who outs themselves on MySpace or wherever. It seems unfair, especially when it's the person's job.

 

And, in that case, said troll would be banned. Sort of like what happened to garamet.

The time when Tamar found out personal information about actormike that he hadn't posted here, but had posted elsewhere, is the whole reason that the rule is here in the first place.

If someone has been paying attention to what I've posted here, a little internet searching might enable them to find out my real name.

If they used it or other information here, though, they'd get banned.

Same for me.

Through means that I have at my disposal, I can find out lots of stuff.

 

^^^ He's said he's a news guy. He's probably got useful connections.

 

I hope you're right.

But assuming you are, I don't really understand how this exception Elwood talked about elsewhere works or why it exists.

Is it really only a Garamet exception, as she's the only one who has been public with her true name and published, and it would be unfair to ban people for calling her by it?

Or were my original fears justified and someone who can say "Raoul is really Elmore Leonard and I have the published work to prove it" or "Max Girth is that videojournalist known as shootER, and here's his credits in KUNT-TV" able to cite the exception and get away with it?

 

Garamet shouldn't be let back in. She violated Kirk's fundamental human rights, as guaranteed by the UN.

Kirk and I discussed this at a Mexican Restaraunt last night. I never will forget the tears in his eyes as he pointed at random Mexicans whose names he didn't actually know and said, "See Philipe over there? Or Jose yonder? Or that ugly fat Mexican woman? Or that dropdead hot one? This is more about them than it is about me. This is about protecting the online identity of all people, American and illegal immigrants in America - at least until we deport them."

Such a beautiful statement.

 

gaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

It's not hard to understand.

Let's say I found your real name and can prove it I CAN'T POST THAT FACT ON WORDFORGE.

The exception would be if you wrote an article where inside the article you said, "I post at Wordforge as Raoul the Red Shirt" then that would be fair game because you would have outed yourself on purpose.