An Important Complaint Against Faceman

I really don't think we want to encourage websites to release the IP addresses of their visitors. People need to think a bit more about how much they want to violate privacy for an issue like this.

Yeah, that's showing him.

Save the trolling for the Red Room.

Oh my God, you don't seriously think IP addresses are "private" do you?


And Face, I notice in your outraged post that you didn't deny it was you.

Lack of denial is not proof itself. However if the IP comes back to be his a good 2 to 3 month ban, if not longer would not be out of order.

Fucking with people's work SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED one little bit. Anyone who does it should have their dick stepped on so hard that those who even think about doing it grab their crotch and wince in pain.

I'm still not seeing the crime here. Vlad asked us to vote in order to influence the outcome of the vote.

The post on the talkback says that Vlad asked us to vote in order to infleunce the outcome of the vote.

What is actually inaccurate about that?

It may be shit strring, but it's not a lie is it?

No, not exactly private, but they do represent data that websites collect about visitors. Reputable websites ought not to release the data they collect, nor should we encourage them to do so.

Here's an idea, don't want the Admins at WF to ask another site about an IP address?

DON'T GO TO ANOTHER SITE AND DEFAME ONE OF OUR MEMBERS USING ONE OF OUR ADMINS NAMES.

Slipperly Slope is a bullshit argument. As is creating a ton of rules.

DON'T. BE. A. FUCKO.

Seriously. Don't be a fucko and you don't have anything to worry about.

We encourage people to be fuckos at this site, surely we can't demand better behavior away from this site.

I wonder if I could change everyone's custom user title to "fucko"?

Well, and here's the flip side to that argument.

If you don't want people sabotaging your attempts to win a contest, don't give them the opportunity by encouraging them to vote for you in said contest. Is it a dick move? Sure, but could it have been avoided? Absolutely.

Gonna go on a limb here, but that sounds like, "If you don't want to be raped, don't wear provocative clothing."

I don't believe the two are comparable nor do I believe in the 'slut was asking to be raped' defense.

Ancalagon agrees: FUCK. YOU. That was MY POINT!




Oh, and mods, don't warn Anc for that.

Merge that warning with any others that he might get into one giant warning.

You know, if something this nasty should go unpunished, even if we can find out the perpetrator, then then entire personal information rule should be thrown out.

Messing with someone's professional life is clearly "playing with personal information" and far worse than posting some picture or linking to a blog.

If this deserves a shrug and a who cares...none of the other stuff people freak out over is worth punishing either.

And what did I do to be impersonated? I suppose just being an Admin here means I deserve people trying to make my friends think that I am betraying them.

I say we ban whoever did this AND get rid of the stupid blanket 'personal info' replacing it with a don't be a fucko rule.

Then you are stuck with "define fucko" and everyone and their dog will disagree on what it means.

Or you will end up with hated posters being accused of being a fucko for every little thing and more popular/longer term posters expecting to get away with anything and everything and their buddies rallying to make sure they can.

Taunting can be humorous at times but there is a line between harmless trolling actually fucking with people's private and professional lives. Recognizing that the separation between 'Real Life' and 'Online' is rapidly shrinking if not gone take things to the next level at your own risk. The line is shifting and it's location is solely at the discretion of of the Board Admin. This is a social board, where our members are our only asset. We will stomp a mudhole in any ass that fucks with our members.

Seriously, how much more complicated do you need?

The rules contain a provision that the implementation of each particular rule should be done through the interpretation of each mod (withint the parameters of the rule of course). From that point of view I'd say the existing rule is usable.

That said, how exactly are you going to find out who the guilty party is?

No, it's more like, "If you don't want to be raped, don't wear provocative clothing and walk down Rape Alley at Rape O'Clock yelling 'Look how sexy I am.'" I'm not making the argument that the victim is responsible for the actions of the offender, but they are responsible for creating the circumstances in which the offense occurred. Put simply, if Nocturne had not decided to fish for votes, we wouldn't be having this discussion, it was entirely within his power to have prevented this, and he chose to live with the consequences of those actions.

What constitutes "harmless trolling" is going to be different for each person. There may be an instance of trolling that the majority of members and/or mods think is ok, but the person on the recieving end is nonetheless left logging off feeling totally attacked and/or depressed. If that is the effect it has on a person should it still be termed "harmless"?

Fact is that if you want a free, no holds barred forum then it's very difficult to have a rule about what is and what is not acceptable trolling. Where do you draw the boundry line?

Rules about personal info and the like are, ultimately, much easier to enforce because they are less about each person's interpretation and more about either having broken the rule omn face value or not.

Surely the most appropriate way of putting this would be to say that it's best advised not to put yourself in the line of fire, but that's not to say that the person who pulled the trigger should get off scott free.

He kind of put the link out there in the first place. He requested that we go to the site and vote.

It isn't like Faceman or whoever it was found the site in some underhanded way. Honestly, no one probably would have cared about Faceman's (or whoever's) comment. It's the internet, people are assholes all over the place. Just look at the comment section for any youtube video or news article.

How can we police that?

Most likely the whole thing would have been ignored, but then Nocturne came back and started this thread and even linked back to Wordforge in the comments for the poll.

I think he sort of blew it out of proportion, if this contest was really that serious they wouldn't allow just anyone to stop by and vote or leave a comment, they would restrict it to fans of the material.

But it seems no harm has been done in any case. Someone here was being a fucko, but that's pretty much par for the course nowadays. I don't really see how this as a violation of personal information.

And besides it could just have easily been a guest or lurker who decided to make the comment on the poll. The original request for votes was made in the Red Room which is completely open to the public. ANYONE could have followed the link and made the comment, a current member, a banned member, even a non-member.

How would we ever determine who did it? How would we police non-members?

Just my two cents.

All much ado a out nothing. I recommend that this thread be closed and we go back to our usual Wordforge programming.

When someone who requests help rigging an open internet poll gets tattled on in an obnoxious manner, that's the internet.

If the poll has real life consequences, that points to the monumental stupidity of the person making the poll, the lack of character and deep sense of entitlement of the person rigging the poll, and the generally assholish nature of the tattler. In a forum of assholes it's more cause to mock the entitlement of the rigger than to ban the asshole for being an asshole.

I forgot to mention, it's clearly time to ban Packard. Enough is enough with that fucko.

Aside from the most obvious fact that you can't punish an unknown person, the personal information rule here has always been that if you post the personal info yourself outside the Blue Room then it's fair game.

Being a total cunt doesn't mean you're breaking a rule. At the end of the day Vlad posted these links himself. I don't see therefore that the personal information rule has been broken. No additional information above and beyond the links that he posted himself has been used and abused.

I think the only reason we are having a little drama over this is because Vlad felt a little put out that someone would be a cunt to him for basically no reason (and frankly whoever did do this is pretty worthy of contempt even if they haven't broken a rule). But now Vlad seems to be well passed it, and the only persons still carrying the drama flag are Anc with his bizarre obsession with being the grand architect of a NuWordforge, and Tamar because her name was used and therefore she refuses to give it the brush off she normally would apply to anyone else.

Yup.

What if Vlad had been breaking the rules of the poll? Would it still be some terrible offence for someone from Wordforge to give them a heads-up?