Fold 1- TubaDiva knew that the SDMB privacy policy prevented her posting information here. So, she posted the information in a LiveJournal community dedicated to the SDMB.
Fold 2- She posted that allegations had been made against SM. These allegations were in no way public knowledge and she knew about them only because she had been contacted in her role as administrator.
I disagree. If you have information, you go to the police and let them handle things.
No, she told him to take a hike. Then, she posted in the LJ SDMB community and SM’s personal LiveJournal the RSO information which she could not post here due to the privacy policy, as well as allegations she was aware of only because she had been privately contacted as an administrator.
I disagree. If he was trolling for kids, you tell the cops so that they can set up an internet sting, catch him, sentence him, and throw him behind bars. You don’t tell him that you’re on to him, giving him a chance to dispose of evidence and warning him to be on guard.
Again- She knew she couldn’t post information on the SDMB due to the privacy policy. So, she went to another online community dedicated to the SDMB and posted it there. She also posted information that was not public, that she received only because she was an administrator, and the publication of which may have hindered an ongoing investigation, or endangered a minor.
The simple answer is, what if she’s wrong? If my neighbor were a registered offender of any sort, and I felt I had evidence suggesting they were about to commit the same crimes again I will go to the police. I won’t go door to door to my other neighbors, telling them what I feel. Seem negligent? Well, what if I’m wrong? I am not my neighbor’s keeper, nor his judge, jurry and sentancer. And while it’s entirely possible he’s a barely reformed criminal slipping into old patterns, he could be a reformed criminal trying desperatly to make a new life in a fashion so straight and narrow as to make a preacher look shifty*.
I don’t get to decide his life. My own? Yes. If he came after my family? I will protect myself. But before anyone begins to froth over that statement, I fell personal armed defense is a last resort…and calling 911 comes way before that. The point I want to make is, I feel what happened here was wrong because it was motiviated by claims that had not be vetted. Accusations that are, to our knowledge, still being investigated. Tuba herself acknowledges she can’t discuss it, so if a newspaper article existed online where Stagemanager had been arrested again don’t you think they could just point to that?
I believe in “Innocent until proven guilty.” Even for those with criminal records. Public warnings about specific individuals should not be necessary on a message board where the board’s own rules specify:
Sadly, Airman, we’re all dangerous out here. Any of us might be exactly what we appear, or not. We might have criminal records, we might be from other countries with different laws, religions, political beliefs. It ought to be enough that we’re always** constantly warning each other, “don’t take anything at face value…”
Still, for all this, I miss the days where the worst in false personas was just a 13-year old body pretending to be a rocket-scientist supermodel.
InkBlot
:eek:
*Please note, I’m in the middle of the bible belt, so your milage on this humerous quip may vary.
**So far as I can tell.
Footnote - posting the link to the database and other identifying personal information (linked or directly posted) also violated LiveJournal’s privacy guidelines.
Ink - great great post.
yeah, I know I said I wouldn’t be back as a contributing member if/when she came back with “ADMINISTRATOR” under her name - but since most of you think we aren’t contributing anything useful when we participate in these threads, it’s not really a ‘contribution’, right?
Absolutely yes … unless the only worthy accomplishment is the changing of minds. But I think the softening of stances and the recognition of gray areas are also worthy accomplishments.
But the understanding of opposing viewpoints on the matter is definitely being fostered – see Airman’s, **Doc Cathode’s ** and **InkBlot’s ** posts above.
I second Doc Cathode’s comments.
…
For those taking the “protecting the younger members of the SDMB” angle – what seems clear to me is that TD aimed to keep landing blows even after SM was effectively handled and removed from the SDMB community. So the prudent protective acts were complete. Once SM started crying “foul!” on LJ … that’s when she publicly made it personal with him. The revelation of his Megan’s Law entry was apparently made to basically put SM in his place and shut him up, and not made to protect anyone.
Catsix, this isn’t helping at all, much like Blue Ruin’s contributions. You’ve made the argument personal when it’s not about TD personally – it’s about covering principles and about ethics.
The many salient points all boil down to one: “You can’t prove it”, which I’ve already said I can’t.
The proof, or lack of same, is in a folder somewhere. I don’t have access to that folder and I don’t think the average member posting in this thread does either.
Lacking hard evidence, we are left to evaluate the situation using what information we DO have, and come to certain conclusions.
I’ve done that, and come to the conclusion that TD’s actions were justified.
Now I must leave cyber space and venture out into the real world for the day.
The reason this thread goes on and on is because the admin allow it and folks still feel like they have something to say. Which is their right to do as long as the admin allow it.
You, of course, can bow out at any time and ignore this. I can’t see how its mere presence is hurting you.
And as for the “door hit you” concept, well IMO this place is not about the admin, it’s about the members. People can in fact not agree with the decision and still carry on here – why? For the same reason people hate George W. but still stay in America. It’s still a pretty great place to live.
If you are a RSO, you have to register with the authorities when you move into a neighborhood. The police might have a meeting to tell the neighbors, they might not. There is no requirement that you tell all and sundry that you committed a sex crime and have paid your debt to society. You can be as private about it as you want, outside of the information you are obligated to share with the local police.
StageManager, though, didn’t keep it a secret that he was an RSO. He mentioned it several times on the boards and has talked about what he did. So, the fact that he has a record in an online sex offender registry wasn’t private information. TubaDiva could have told everyone that he’s an RSO. It’s merely the truth and a repeat of information he’d already shared. For that information to be coming from an admin with some fuzzy “Due to recent information I feel it’s necessary to remind everyone…” would work as a sufficient warning to the community. There was no necessity to post his name and home address. There was no necessity to imply that he was fishing around for children to rape.
To try to pass off doing both of those unnecessary things as just trying to be helpful and informative is an interesting feat of mental gymnastics. I don’t know that TubaDiva harbors a wish deep in her heart that someone will nip over to SM’s house and club him to death… but that’s certainly within the realm of possibility.
ALL OF THE ABOVE IS IRRELEVANT. A user posted personally identifying information about another user contrary to their wishes and without permission, in violation of privacy policy. What should happen to a user that does that?
Well, there’s also a “The RSO angle is a red herring.” point.
I don’t believe anyone has even tried to counter that one.
This is a very important point, one which I hope those who are defending Tuba and her concerns about the minor in question will consider. Because there are plenty of other potential victims out there. If this guy is back to his old ways, then he should be in jail where he can’t hurt anyone, not just scared off from one corner of the internet.
Ever consider that maybe, just maybe, some people come to a decision by discussing issues with others? I know, it’s a crazy idea, but work with me for a second. Maybe all this back and forth is a continuing search for common ground so we can build a solid foundation upon which we can agree to disagree.
See, to me this doesn’t follow. What’s wrong with tolerating the decision and continuing to debate the underlying issues?
In all seriousness, consider all the GD threads in which consensus never gets reached, even after hundreds of posts. Why is this topic different?
In fact, perhaps this thread should be renamed and moved to Great Debates. That would allow focus on the issues, and make the personal attack an out-of-bounds tactic.
…
Also, take care when invoking the “love it or leave it” stance regarding the SDMB, as the same mantra can be applied to this thread itself. Is it sporting for someone to say “Don’t like it? Don’t read it! Stay out!” I don’t think it is.
Okay, if there is hard proof that SM was trollng for victims, then why isn’t he in jail or at least facing prosecution? I would assume that any inappropriate contact with a minor would be in violation of the terms of his release; or in the very least, would be grounds for hauling his ass back into court.
If, on the other hand, the proof exists and he was trolling for victims here – and he’s not back in jail – then the action taken by Tuba was incredibly irresponsible and may put future victims at risk.
Let me make this clear: If you’re right, and there is “proof”, then this guy should be in jail and not just ostracized from some little internet community.
First, this thread and one other made me look up sex offenders in my area. I was pretty surprised when I ran across a friend of mine, not a close friend, but definitely a friend. I think it was for 3rd degree sexual assault. I’m not even sure what that is, but from what I know of him, I’m pretty sure that would have something to do with his wife. I’m not sure exactly how I feel about it, but I don’t think it will stop me from being friends with him. He has always been a good guy that does dumb things… and immediately gets caught for them. Some people are just that way.
Regarding TD, I don’t know her in any way. I remember thinking she handled the magician’s tricks thing poorly. Reading about what happened this time, it sounds like she showed very bad judgement. In both cases her heart might have been in the right place, but there is an old saying about the road to hell. Although like others, I really have no dog in this fight, it seems that resigning might be the best course. As things stand every time she acts it’s going to be under a microscope. It will be a distraction to the purpose of the board.
SM was asked about this some time back on LJ (SDMB community, IIRC). His response was that, under the conditions of his RSO status, he was perfectly free to contact minors via e-mail.
I understand he is probably the worst source for definitive information on this matter. But if he’s correct, it seems to explain a lot – specifically, why law enforcement couldn’t or wouldn’t do anything about SM in response to the accusative e-mail sent to TD et al. Frustration about the inaction of law enforcement was alluded to in one of Arnold Winkelreid’s early posts in this thread.
Play on words: Ignorance of the law accuses nobody, the phrase means. The post I was responding to seemed to be condemning Tuba for acting in a legal fashion because she didn’t know that she was acting in a legal fashion, and that seems to me to be a rather silly point. Your ignorance of the law doesn’t make you guilty (accuse you) any more than it makes you innocent (excuses you).
