Who is not? I’m looking at it from my perspective.
Thread is posted. Dissolves into madness, as many do.
People use the thread to hunt down and attack our Cellulicious Parental Unit and harass her.
CPU asks SDMB to delete the thread, citing harassment that quite possibly borders on criminiality, if not steps fully into it.
SDMB declines.
Now and again, the thread is brought up, and fresh harassment begins.
Seems rather clear cut to me. Perhaps it will take legal action on CPU’s part to make SDMB give a damn, maybe not. I am not a lawyer, nor have I counseled her to do so.
If there is a legal reason to delete or not delete threads, it has never been expressed or applied in any consistent manner that I have ever seen. Except to consistently protect a particular staffer on one particular matter where it was very clear that SDMB could get in legal trouble.
I think SDMB is probably thinking she’d never do more than bitch, and her harassers wouldn’t actually put a sack of flaming poop on her doorstep, or stupidly threaten her again or in any traceable/prosecutable manner, or anything else, and won’t delete the thread(s).
Not intimate, but my original WTF was based soley on what I’d read she’d posted here - that it was asked to be deleted because of harassment, and they said no.
Her post her was that she didn’t know me. Whereupon we started emailing each other. Do a search on this thread for Uncommon, we covered it.
Funny. But no. I’ve been researching the original quote and am seeing why people took it in the meaning it apparently gives. I may be crazy, incoherent, insane, hormonal, whacky, and scatterbrained, but no one ever accused me of quipping after adequate research.
It seems that she was the one who facilitated the harassment by starting the infamous thread to begin with. The SDMB is under no obligation to remove threads people start that don’t turn out how the OP wanted.
Now this is just silly. There’s only one reasonable way to take this statement, given that is is clearly cribbed from the old adage “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics,” with the last item obviously seen to be more contemptuous than the others. Whether we want to be offended or not, it takes an awful lot of mental gymnastics to think it was not meant to offend.
As for the rest of the thread, all I can say is that, while I have some serious issues with events described in the other thread, **Spongemom ** has certainly earned my respect for showing up here. I doubt I’d have to sack to do the same.
Yeah, I caught that you started emailing today. You’re apparently upset that the SDMB didn’t act on Spongemom’s apparent requests for assistance, but that knowledge was acquired after you posted the OP. So what was the OP about?
Consternation that Spongemom was allowed back?
Outrage that she was suspended to begin with?
Anger that your A/C broke and the only thing your mother would give you to cool down with was a damp sponge?
I await your response whilst on the edge of my seat.
I’ve often heard it attributed to Benjamin Disraeli. A quick google says (among other theories) that Mark Twain used the quote and attributed it to Disraeli.
And you weren’t the only one. If Mynn meant it as a compliment, then the lprimary source of the original quote certainly does not back up her meaning, and no one familiar with the original would ever have been able to figure it out without a diagram.
Any personal information that a Doper chooses to release is there own damn fault. Having publicly posted information pointed to by someone else is a criminal act in what way?
The Humble One did a silly maybe even stupid thing that was dealt with and is now over. The Other Doper Who Loves Pets (and who doesn’t, btw? those cute little faces, that silly prancing, the soft furriness of… ok, back on track now), made a public posting that backfired. Some Nimrods that may (or may not) have been from here then resorted to cyber stalking and possible irl interaction. This implicates the SDMB or the Reader in what way?
(Any lawyers want to chime in with educated guesses instead of this virtual vomit we’ve all been willingly spewing and then wallowing in?)
If nothing else, Mynn Are From Planet WhatTheFuck, you have provided us all with a nice change of pace from the usual well thought out, if somewhat lame and MPSIMSish Pits of the past several weeks.
The point, Mynn, is that you are not qualified to be a judge of what is sane because you are batshit insane yourself.
You haven’t counseled her to be a lawyer?
For the love of all that is holy, let this go.
The only person hurting SpongeMom any more is you.
Your sentence structure wouldn’t serve to order breakfast, much less defend another poster in as complicated a situation as this may be. So stop helping. She will likely thank you for it.
Call me an idiot for posting to this but…
Wouldn’t it be sufficient for the SDMB staff to remove any link to Spongemom’s message board from the offending thread without deleting the thread.
Thereby stopping any risk of people reading that thread in the future and then going to Spongemom’s site, whilst not giving the impression of deleting a thread whenre several SDMB’ers showed their real colours (so to speak).
Ok, now that I’ve scared Miller and made Slacker giggle, I’d like to actually jump in!
Hey Mynn? Who put the link’s to SM’s other board/homepage/whatever here? Just SM herself, right? And isn’t it her board? So if/when someone from here shows up there to start flinging poo, she can smite them at will, right?
So, if anything, shouldn’t the real lesson be “Don’t post where else you hang out online, lest folks follow you there to fling poo” huh? Or maybe we can settle the whole kerfluffle by just pointing out that any threats that were possibly made against SM are different than the TD style threats, cuz the threat there was legal action against the board. Only makes sense that TPTB are going to treat “your person did this and it may be legally actionable” way differently than “someone may or may not have come from your board and threatened me in a different place.”
How can you reasonably expect the mods/admins here to alter anything here based on what happens on SM’s other board?
Argh, fucking kudzu thread! I’m postin’ it anyway.
IANAL, but legal action = discoverable material = very good reason to stop thread (lest the Chi-town Reader face even more supeonas asking it to identify every poster). No legal action means thread can degenerate. Possible legal action usually not good enough for deletion. I’ve seen other threads disappeared when it contained potentially discoverable material in an on-going suit. If I were a mod, I would likely have closed the thread at Spongemom’s request, but not deleted it. Probably would delete that Scott Plaid thing, though, as the hamsters, even the newer, more improved ones, cry everytime someone posts to that thread. Won’t we think of the hamsters?!
