I got that from the post, and it’s cetainly true, but in this thread I’m concerned about an attitude from some here that all’s fair and on the table when disagreeing with another poster.
Lest there be any confusion, I am officially opposed to stalking other posters*, regardless of whether you disagree with them. Also, Simple Linctus went way over the line by initiating off-board contact.
*Disclosure: I am Facebook friends with a number of posters here, and “real life” friends with some of those people and some other posters. I assume that doesn’t count as stalking since they accepted my friend requests or friend requested me, and don’t scream and call the police when we go out for beers and stuff.
Duplicate post.
A proper friend waits until the tab is paid before calling the police.
I’m not suggesting it’s fair game and we don’t encourage it. I’m acknowledging that this stuff happens online and that posters should be circumspect for that reason.
My apologies for reversing myself and for perhaps underreacting to the phone call incident. Simple Linctus has been suspended indefinitely while the staff decides what to do about his attempt to contact pchaos’ office.
If we’re operating under precedent, it’s 30 days suspension and welcomed back with loving arms, right?
This will be the one post where I strongly advise everybody to stick to the actual thread topic.
Isn’t the thread topic what the punishment should be for looking into a poster’s private life?
No. It’s about posting that information on this board, not the act of looking for that information. Like I said, your next post about this hijack - or any comments posts by anyone else furthering this hijack - will result in warnings.
Simulposted with Marley’s warning and removed.
I don’t share the outrage. (Although, I do agree it shouldn’t be done.) I don’t see the need for discipline in the form of suspension or banning. There wasn’t a clear violation of any rule. How is this different than looking for information about **umkay’s **funeral?
My opinion, tell **Simple Linctus **this wasn’t cool and move on.
So which of “that information” did SL post on this board that warrants the suspension?
Because looking for information isn’t the same as calling someone’s home or place as business. That’s much more intrusive.
He’s being suspended while we decide how to handle his phone call to pchaos’ office (or what he believed might be pchaos’ office). The thread is about that issue and about disclosing posters’ potential real-life information.
So to be clear, you’re saying SL didn’t post any of that information on this board?
I didn’t really participate in that whole shitstorm but I imagine nobody contacted umkay’s “relatives” and left voicemails. What if the dude he contacted isn’t even the right guy?
When you figure out how to make it apply to Google, Facebook and Acxiom, let me know.
You would know the answer if you’d read the Pit thread or paid attention to this one. If you haven’t done that, feel free to bow out of this discussion. If you have a real question after you’ve looked at the Pitting and reviewed this thread, you can post it. If you just have snark, don’t bother.
When you figure out I was talking about SDMB policy and not the entire internet, let me know.
Marley, you’ve stated that the purpose of this thread is to talk about personal information posted to this board. You announced SL’s suspension in this thread.
I am asking you a direct question: Did SL post personal information to the board? You’re refusing to answer me.
You can answer, or you can let your stubbornness be on full display. Which one will you choose?