You can’t mean that! But she’s so humble!! Hasn’t she vaunted her humility many times on SDMB?? :rolleyes:
See, this I don’t get. I get being called an ‘asslicker’ for being happy TD is back, even though I don’t agree. Thing is, who the fuck are you to decide what’s best for the SDMB?
You don’t agree with the Admins’ decision here. Great. I respect that. But once you start spouting ‘all she has to do is x and we’ll all be okay,’ you’ve crossed over into self-righteous asshattery, especially since you’re the one making a stink. I could just as easily tell you to stop bitching because you’re harming the SDMB with your negativity.
Since we’re talking about ‘what’s best’ I can tell you what I think is best- getting TD back to work as an admin, somehow keeping this place running, and everyone shutting up about it, and either staying or going as they see fit without all of the hystrionics. See how easy that is?
You’re suggesting here that the manager went into the bank’s database and released that information. Tuba did nothing even remotely similar to this. If she had gone into the DB to get this info, and publicized it, I’d call for her head also.
If our bank manager, on his own time, using his own devices, publicized information about someone, would you call the bank accusing the bank of violating their privacy policy? I wouldn’t. This would be an issue between him and the manager.
I think the SDMB is taking action because the masses demand it. If we were all taking this in stride, as though it weren’t a big deal, they wouldn’t do a thing.
A lot of the wind would have been knocked out of the sails of this negativity if she had come back as a normal member, or say a MPSIMS mod. 
I would think that’s self evident. If you are glad that Tuba is back as admin you can’t just wish away the negativity. It’s part of the cost of having her as admin.
That they are. And that makes it even worse.
True. Though you guys on the other side would have to deal with our negativity at what we perceive to be the railroading of a good admin.
Look, even if she resigned now, I’d be pissed because of all of the ‘she should fall on her sword for the good of the many’ comments tossed off here. If the other admins bowed to that pressure and forced her out, I’d feel the same betrayal you are no doubt feeling, and my future status would be in doubt.
No, what I’m suggesting here is that the bank manager released information that they were privy to ONLY because of their position as bank manager, not because it was in the database. Hence the major violation.
Oh you’re right StoneBrow. It’s too late. If she was forced out now, it would only escalate the storm. The time for a compromise decision is passed.
The staff has to move on, be cautious of a replay by Tuba, and find new ways to revitalize the board. I’m waiting for some checkmarks on the other side of the ledger, as the shine has come off my SDMB experience in a few ways.
Thank you for recognizing that I have not behaved like a cunt in this thread. I think for the most part, the disagreement is going well.
And why in the tone she used? That whole ‘I can’t post this without your permission. Bet you won’t give it to me, either, so I’m sticking it on LJ’ thing just - wow - was not the tone of someone who was trying to do the ‘right thing’.
It’s ironic then, that this territory wasn’t so dreadfully forbidden for TubaDiva, but it is for us.
I’ve also heard that you should never trust someone who describes him(her)self as honest.
Right you are. They should be taking action, more than they have, because it would be the right thing to do. Not demonstrating that they will only attempt to do the right thing when their arms are twisted.
Violation of what? Of my personal privacy, perhaps. Violation of the bank’s privacy policy, probably not. If the information I provided to the bank was kept secure and private, then the bank upheld its part of the bargain. The manager may have violated my privacy, but that is between me and him, not between me and the bank. This is a bit of a fine point, Tuba has arguably violated someone’s privacy, but I don’t think the SDMB privacy policy has anything to do with it.
Obviously the bank could have a very expansive privacy policy that covers these sorts of things. I don’t believe the SDMB had such a policy, though they might in the future.
Would you be as pissed off if it were a barista from Starbucks who overheard all this while building me a MochaFrappaLatteccino? Starbucks takes my CC info in payment, they have a duty to keep my info (name, CC#, address, etc) a secret, but BaristaBoy trots my name, address (from phone book) and situation around town… Unless he took my name from the CC or Starbucks’ system, the company is not where the problem is.
SDMB policy be damned – ANY kind of privacy violation needs to be taken seriously.
If she didn’t violate the SDMB policy, then WHY did she go over to Live Journal and spill, instead of doing it here?
Not to mention that according to her, she certainly THOUGHT she would have been violating the SDMB privacy policy.
Nothing stands out to me in this more than her words: “The privacy policy prevents me from doing this on the boards, so I’m doing it here.”
She knew what she was doing was wrong and she didn’t care. Not a shining characteristic of a “humble” person of authority.
I’ll address this in a more focused manner: I believe a mod or admin (or a paying member, for that matter) should be held accountable for more than simply following SDMB policy.
Then why did she specifically say that the SDMB privacy policy prohibits her from saying what she wanted on the SD, and without Stage Manager’s permission? Because the SDMB privacy policy has EVERYTHING to do with it. She said wasn’t bound by those same policies off the SD. That’s what I’m calling bullshit on. If she’s bound by the SDMB policy on the SD, then as an Admin, she’s bound by the same policy off the SD. Especially when she puts her SD Admin signature on a post off the SD.
It seems she thought that that the onus to follow SDMB policy was not in effect during visits to other Internet sites. Cheesesteak appears to agree with this – if so, I strongly disagree with him.
IMHO, the SDMB policies to which mods and admins (and members) are accountable should be portable.
Cheesesteak, you’re missing a big fat point here: Ed has admitted this was a serious fuck up.
From here:
(bolding mine)
Got it?
Exactly-if the policy only means releasing the information ON THIS BOARD, then what good is it? That’s not a “privacy” policy, that’s a “Do not talk about this openly, but we’ll go other places and gossip” policy.
That’s a false analogy, bub. You’re not taking into the account the publication by said bank manager of an uninvestigated (at least by the proper authorities) accusation made by one of his customers during the course of an interview with him, and only him, for an overdraft extension that another customer, who happens to be, let’s say, a Mafia heavy, is stealing from the first customer.
Clearly Mr Bank Manager has a duty to release this information to the authorities so they can investigate the claims. What he should NOT under any circumstances do is release this information publicly where Mr Mafia Heavy can read it. As he has, not only has he possibly tainted and disrupted the proper investigation, and unnecessarily attacked Mr Mafia Heavy’s reputation, he has also endagered the life of the accusor.
Continue to defend TubaDiva if you feel you have to, but at least try to understand what it was she did wrong (hint: not the release of StageManager’s Meagan’s Law info).
Ok, I know when I’m beat. I still don’t quite get it, but I’m willing to concede the point.
It’s probably my black and white thinking on the subject. Violating the privacy policy is a big no-no, so I want a more egregious violation (like pulling CC info from the database) than we have here before calling it.