# Outing another user **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [September 11, 2010, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354 "2010-09-11T00:17:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/1 "2010-09-11T00:17:35Z")
Is it against the rules to post the real life identity of another poster? I thought it was, but that’s what happened [in this lively thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12900857&postcount=89). Just because you can use the google to deduce who a poster is doesn’t mean it’s cool to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/2 "2010-09-11T00:45:58Z")
I think that normally outing another user would be a problem, but (1) **envirocr** has said that he has a connection with the website; and (2) In post #35 of that thread, **envirocr** said “I will tell Mr. Wolfe”, so the poster cited in the OP actually got it wrong – **envirocr** works for Charles Wolfe, unless he’s telling an untruth there. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/3 "2010-09-11T01:02:12Z")
I’m commenting on just this single incidence, the one to which you linked. I don’t think that Mr. Wolfe was “outed” in the classic sense. And, since Mr. Wolfe is not afraid to be a public person(his blog and many many web hits showing him, his qualifications, etc.), I saw no reason to do anything(as a mod) about this. Mr. Wolfe was first “outed” by **E. Thorp**. > [@E. Thorp](#): > > This is correct. I subscribe to the blog, saw the image, was intrigued by it and, since the city being depicted was unidentified, posted a link to the image here to ask about it. > > I am a fan of myurbanist and have learned a lot from Chuck Wolfe’s view of things. **Mr. Wolfe** winked in acknowledgement > [@envirocr](#): > > Thanks > > I will tell Mr. Wolfe 😉 Then, our member **Bearflag70** tries to be helpful, but introduces a non-relevant link into the thread. > [@Bearflag70](#): > > [http://www.envirocr.com/](http://www.envirocr.com/) > > Not an intellectual property firm Our member, **Dewey Finn** was the first to state that our guest, **envirocr** was probably > [@Dewey Finn](#): > > … Charles R. Wolfe, who created most of the content on the [myurbanist.com](http://myurbanist.com) website. Mr. Wolfe’s website says that he specializes in environmental and land use law. So perhaps he’s not as well-versed in copyright law. (BTW, if he’s still reading this, I’d like to know why he put a 2006 copyright on a photo taken in 1917.) ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/4 "2010-09-11T01:10:40Z")
the same issue arose a few months ago with **Stoid’s** court case - she gave enough information in her threads to allow Dopers to identify her. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/5 "2010-09-11T01:16:31Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > **Mr. Wolfe** winked in acknowledgement > > Then, our member **Bearflag70** tries to be helpful, but introduces a non-relevant link into the thread. Exactly. I didn’t exactly divulge some deep, dark secret. I think that I just debunked some invalid speculation. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/6 "2010-09-11T01:21:09Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > the same issue arose a few months ago with **Stoid’s** court case - she gave enough information in her threads to allow Dopers to identify her. Not exactly the same thing – **stoid** was (is) a long-term member who started numerous threads on her court case; in one that she started after it was resolved, someone posted a link to the actual decision. I removed that link. This person came here after a link to something he or she had posted elsewhere was given here, and joined in order to protest that link. ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/7 "2010-09-11T02:33:12Z")
> [@samclem](#): > > I don’t think that Mr. Wolfe was “outed” in the classic sense. And, since Mr. Wolfe is not afraid to be a public person(his blog and many many web hits showing him, his qualifications, etc.), I saw no reason to do anything(as a mod) about this. Fair enough. I’ll withdraw my objection to this particular instance. On further investigation, I see that the about page at the website in question identifies the blog’s author (sorta). I apologize to Dewey Finn for characterizing his post as “uncool.” But I’ll renew my question on the broader issue. One can choose to have a blog and also not chose to reveal his real life identity on this board. Is there a rule against revealing a poster’s real life identity without their permission and/or when it’s not otherwise relevant? I was under the impression that it always had been. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/8 "2010-09-11T12:43:11Z")
Yes, that is generally frowned upon. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/9 "2010-09-11T14:23:26Z")
> [@](#): > > Is there a rule against revealing a poster’s real life identity without their permission and/or when it’s not otherwise relevant? I was under the impression that it always had been. I would consider this to be jerkish behavior. ---
**Author:** ![TubaDiva](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tubadiva/32/507_2.png) [@TubaDiva](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TubaDiva)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2010, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/outing-another-user/553354/10 "2010-09-11T15:11:40Z")
The thread in question has been closed.