Is that true, moderators?
Just suppose the following scenario occurred:
Poster A issues a threat against poster B.
Poster B goes to the police.
The police take the threat seriously.
The police come to the Straight Dope, asking for information to trace Poster A.
In such a circumstance, would you really ban poster B, the victim?
See, you now post the scenario I was trying to think of. I doubt the moderators know, that decision probably resides with Ed and the owners. I’m sure they don’t want to be pinned down by a pre-stated ruling on situations that haven’t come up, and we hope never do.
As Irishman notes, if such a horrid thing should happen, it would be up to Ed what to do. Generally speaking, if a legal action is underway, lawyers advise that it shouldn’t be discussed in public (including Message Boards) since people have a tendency to say things that get them into trouble – even victims of the original act can open their mouths and cause problems to their case, if not opening a new case for libel against the alleged perp. So long as the discussion is hypothetical, we shrug our shoulders because there’s lots of possibilities.
To be clear: in Peter Morris’s scenario, the SDMB certainly co-operates with the police.
As Colibri noted above, the threat was not the only way in which this person was behaving badly, it was just the last drop that overflowed the camel.
Uh oh. Might it be a good idea to disappear one of Hal Bristons’ more famous posts? A charge of beastiality might be bad.
He’s fine. He’s from NJ and it’s not illegal here. Yet.
You mean baaa-a-a-d.