You can’t sensibly compare something that happens entirely off board and coincidentally involves another poster to deliberately taking a message board dispute into real life. If you cut someone off on the road, we don’t know about that - and we have a rule discouraging posters from handling their off-board disputes on the SDMB. On the other hand if you’re in an argument with someone and you disclose on the message board that you’ve taken that into some other venue, that’s different.
pchaos’ name was there for anyone who did a search.
By that line of logic, pchaos’ number was there for anyone who did a search, wasn’t it?
If pchaos and SL were friends in real life, and then SL came on here and posted his number, or put it up on some other website and then told others how to get to it, then yes that’s definitely revealing private info about another person, and should result in a permanent ban.
But SL just found info that was freely and publicly available.
I agree that what he did was dumb, but I don’t think it violates any of the board’s rules except for being a jerk, which it does and that’s why it’s awesome that this board has that rule.
So, overall I’m fine with SL getting a moderator warning or note or whatever… but it’s not like he actually revealed any private info about pchaos that anyone could have gotten on their own. He wasn’t privy to any extra private info, in other words, and shouldn’t be moderated under that provision.
No. We don’t know if the guy he called was actually pchaos. A lot of the information matches what he’s posted here, but that’s neither here nor there. Stuff he posted on other message boards is entirely different from his telephone number.
Of course it was. We’re not sanctioning him for sharing the phone number (he didn’t) or disclosing its existence (Google did that). The issue is that Simple Linctus was the one who made the call.
Yes, thank you.
No, the link in the OP goes to page 3. There are no posts by Simple Lictus on page 3. There is one quoted post by Simple Lictus. The first quote by Acsenray is from page 10. The relevant bits (i.e. bits about the phone call) seem to start there. Unless one wishes to bring in whatever AClockworkMelon did. That didn’t happen on page 3, either.
Ok wait… so the sanctioning is about actually making the call itself, and not just sharing how to get it?
Well in that case it has nothing to do with the board.
I thought the issue was that he found out pchaos’ name from another board, looked up his name and deduced his city and then guessed at his phone number… and then shared that line of reasoning on how another poster could get the number as well, which is a jerkish thing to do.
Actually making the call and leaving a voice message is dumb but it is in no way within the jurisdiction of this board’s moderating.
Don’t be silly. If it was a *legitimate *call, he couldn’t have left a voice mail.
How about coming up with a rule prohibiting it then? Or are we just supposed to know? As you can tell by reactions on both threads, some people think SL was clearly out of line and “creepy,” while others don’t understand what’s wrong with it. An ambiguous rule invites arbitrary enforcement and spotty compliance.
The people who really don’t understand it are (1) a 13 year old, and (2) Simple Linctus, who also has interesting ideas about the legality of faking prescriptions, among much else. Maybe I missed someone, but all the other posts I looked at seem to agree that the phone call was over the line.
It would’ve had nothing to do with the board if Simple Linctus hadn’t made the call after a discussion on the board and hadn’t posted about it. My initial reasoning was that it took place off-board and was simply dumb but out of our hands, but I’m glad the rest of the staff didn’t agree. This is stupid and creepy behavior and it ought to be discouraged for the few posters who couldn’t figure out on their own that it’s a bad idea.
There’s no line of reasoning to share. It’s just searching the web.
I’m one of those who can see the “it’s over the line” argument. But to me it’s more of a speeding ticket rather than a Felony. I wouldn’t have done it, but it would never have occurred to me it was a violation of Board rules.
Frankly, yes. We moderate a lot of thing that are a lot less “jerk”-ish than calling up a stranger out of the blue to ask them to verify their SDMB identities. Really Not All That Bright’s post sums it up pretty well- although Anonymous User is 15. I’ll ask the other mods if they feel we need to add this to the rules someplace.
Either way, it wouldn’t hurt.
I see SL’s action as jerkish - however I could see a similar “release of info” as not being jerkish (I gave an example above), but still in violation of privacy (ie against board rules).
So I’m guessing I prolly shouldn’t use my google fu to identify Silenus, and have a couple cases of chilli with beans delivered to his office? Even if that is an obviously superior form of chilli, and he is poisoning the minds of his students with notions of beanless chilli?
What about the children? The poor children forced to a life of misery and beanless chilli…Can it really be wrong when it feels so right?
Well, I’m at a loss at understanding this one then.
I was on board with it being jerkish behavior if he posted exactly how he went about finding some guy’s phone number that may or may not have been pchaos’, but the actual call itself (which was incredibly benign in content if not creepy in origins) is in no way jerkish behavior nor is it within the purview of moderators as the rule stands.
Since we’ve already gone over that he didn’t publicize any private information, the only rule he could be found in violation of is “don’t be a jerk,” and if calling a phone number you find online based on looking up a person’s name, and leaving them a message with a password is “being a jerk” then I am going to have to redefine what “being a jerk” means in the context of our user agreement.
The only jerkish behavior would be telling people how to find the info and encouraging others to give him a call and harass him.
There is nothing to reveal and there isn’t some complicated procedure involved here. It’s a little bit of Googling and that’s all. So the issue isn’t that Simple Linctus outed pchaos somehow- pchaos did that to himself by posting a lot of details about himself. (pchaos has also not complained about any of this.) The issue is that Simple Linctus took it on himself to “investigate” this mystery by bothering a poster off-board and asking him to confirm his identity. There was no reason to do that, he had no right to do it, and it’s inappropriate.
If you do this, count me in. 
So, would it be fair to extrapolate from this then that any off-board conduct is fair game for moderation if it violates “being a jerk” and involves (or potentially/purportedly involves) another poster on the board?
Will such moderation decisions be made solely on the admission of the original poster (by bragging or just telling about what he did off the board), or should we require that another poster lodge a complaint?
My questions are sincere and I am not trying to be annoying or argumentative, and I appreciate your answers.