http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18711686&postcount=263
I received a warning for posting the name of the alleged rape victim. I only did this after the woman’s attorney displayed an evidence bag with her full name during a press conference carried on Canadian and American television. I did not break pit rules by suggesting the woman be harassed, nor did I provide contact information.
I request this warning be rescinded.
I agree. The names of victims of sexual assault are available in court records. It is simply journalistic convention that prevents them from being published. The SDMB is not a news organization.
dalej42 did not post contact information. His thoughts about the woman are well known on the board, but nevertheless he should not be punished for posting legally available information.
My opinion is that Miller did the right thing.
I think Miller did the right thing too. The woman’s name was accidentally exposed. In a thread where the OP keeps calling for her identity to be exposed so she can be evaluated as a gold digger, it’s concerning that the OP rushed to get her (unusual) name out there as quickly as possible.
If I were you, I’d consider myself lucky to escape with just a warning.
Come on, even the seediest of media outlets, out of common decency, respect the identity of rape victims. The victim is not on trial and their identity is inconsequential at this time.
I am guessing the worst case scenario where a crazy person googles and finds the name from this site, scary to think of the liabilities, and that whole thread is pretty scary.
Was he warned for breaking a rule or because people just didn’t like what he did?
The alleged victim’s attorney is a high profile criminal defense attorney named Thomas Eoannou. Mr. Eoannou is no stranger to cases involving celebrities as he previously represented county music star Tim McGraw. It was Mr. Eoannou who released the name of the victim by displaying it on television.
An alleged rape victim is not a CIA agent, in the witness protection program, or an undercover police officer. If her own attorney is cavalier enough to display her name during a high profile press conference, then mentioning it in a pit thread should not be justification for a warning.
As a reasonable compromise, I suggest retracting the warning but leave the woman’s name redacted in the thread and I will not post her name again in that thread nor any other thread.
Posting her name was a jerk move.
In the future, perhaps consider not being a jerk.
It is if you want to start a harassment campaign.
Ahhh, the Mulligan clause!
It should also be noted that law enforcement and the media are not publishing her name or photos out of respect for her family as well.
+1 jsgoddess
So what? We’re a privately operated message board. As we frequently have pointed out, the First Amendment does not apply here. We are under no obligation to provide a means to publicize the names of rape victims. We can certainly choose to impose the same conventions as news organizations.
This was unquestionably a jerk move. Actually, in my opinion one of the biggest jerk moves I have ever seen on the board. As far as I am considered, dalej42 was fortunate to have only received a warning for this.
Complete agreement. I might even favor poster-specific restrictions on threads he’s able to start or participate in.
It doesn’t happen every day that all the mods are in unequivocal agreement about something.
Agreeing that dredging up the name of an alleged rape victim being an enormous jerk move is one of those times.
Miller gave a warning instead of a note?
Daymn.
Checks paper for weather report in Hell. Yep, it’s snowing.
If people have trouble understanding why this is a good board policy, please read this 12 year old post by **TeaElle **
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=3747242&postcount=1
You are in no position to be bargaining with us. Do anything like that again and your posting privileges will be under discussion. Actually, they already are.
At least it accomplished one thing.
Clearly you have not encountered the OP before.
Sadly, I have 
Let’s not make it personal please.
But yes, I agree with the rest of the mod staff. It breaks the ‘jerk’ rule and therefore is subject to warnings and more.