Please respect the anonymity of your fellow members

One of the nice things about forums like ours is that we get to say what we really think, thanks to our relative anonymity.

So that everyone continues to enjoy that freedom, please don't disclose any information about any other member here. It's only courteous to allow people to be the gatekeepers of their own information and to disclose or not disclose about themselves as they see fit.

We're not making a new rule, but there is an existing rule against https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing. If we see this becoming a problem, we'll take additional action, but for now, I'm asking that we all just refrain from doing it. As eddie says (a lot), just address the post rather than the poster and we'll avoid 90 percent of problems like this.

Really? You have got to be kidding!


Has Didge gone again?

Ps happy post turkey day slump. We had dim sum today and leftovers tonight - score.

To be honest, I am on didge's side here; I don't think sassy was right to post that link whether it was him or not.

For the record, I get on with sassy fine and didge (at the moment) too, and at first I wasn't too concerned becasue as sassy pointed out, the pic was on a public webpage

However, that's no excuse really.

I don't think we should go around posting up stuff we think we've found on other posters.

Sorry but I have to be fair. Sassy should've been pulled up over this and I do stand in didge's corner on this issue as I've said in the admin section.

Was it the picture of Didge that looks like this...?

I agree one should respect the anonymity of posters.
I also agree the posts should be discussed and NOT the posters lwhich has happened a zillion times to me over the years, it spoils nearly all topics, causes retaliation and mayhem when the diatribe is allowed to run rampant, also when particularly condoned by forum management elsewhere.

I approve the comment of management here on this, I would ask for the same if I had a forum of my own.

NO NO NO I am not creeping.

See ya later .

Going to lunch in Stratford Upon Avon.

So didge is gone again?

WTF...did I miss something????????

And me, what happened?

Doesn't anyone get bored of Didge deleting his account and then creating a new one the next day?

Anyway, there is already a rule about posting personal info.

Posts that include personal details about a particular member in abusive fashion are not allowed, and members who abusively post personal information about others may be subject to administrative action, including a permanent ban, at the administrators' discretion.

Is this to do with the thing that happened a few days ago? Sassy went off last night and hasn't posted since.

Sassy said she was going away for a few days.

I do not know many here , I wish someone would state what is actually going on, confused.

Stormee wrote:I do not know many here , I wish someone would state what is actually going on, confused.

I don't know what's gone on today because I've been out. The other day, Didge said Sassy had sucked up to Ben to avoid being banned, and that he was going to report this forum to Forumotion if Ben didn't do something. I think it was to do with some reference to Didge's Facebook or something.

There is room for all sorts on here if people behave Miss Ragga, I am certain you already know that with your forum longevity and experience of aerosolz. lol lol lol .

Tommy Monk wrote:Was it the picture of Didge that looks like this...?

Nah, that is me.

Stormee wrote:There is room for all sorts on here if people behave Miss Ragga, I am certain you already know that with your forum longevity and experience of aerosolz. lol lol lol .

Nobody behaves on here Stormee - have you not noticed?

Isn't that a good thing.....as long as personal insults are kept to a minimum?

I am getting a bit sick of Stepford forums where everyone has to toe the line.

Raggamuffin wrote:Doesn't anyone get bored of Didge deleting his account and then creating a new one the next day?

Not bored...sometimes confused.

I like didge. He's a prolific poster, intelligent guy, and holds up his own and more around here. But he does have these 'flare-up' moments.

Some people know how to push his buttons, too.

To clarify:
Didge and sassy got into a debate and sassy posted up a link which claimed to be didge on another site.
The link has since been removed

Didge reported sassy.

Sassy claims there is nothing wrong in posting a link that is on a public domain for anyone to find.
Didge claims it isn't him anyway but that it's against the rules to dox someone.

And that's it. In a nutshell.

Didge has left because Ben has taken the decision not to "punish" sassy and feels it unfair, and yes, sassy is away for a few days.

I don't yet know either of the two mentioned, but personally I feel it's wrong when people drag things, especially photos over from one forum to another to make a point.
Maybe a person feels comfortable sharing something with people on one site they would not feel happy with sharing on another.....the fact that it's an open site and the photo can be seen by all makes no difference imo.

Syl wrote:I don't yet know either of the two mentioned, but personally I feel it's wrong when people drag things, especially photos over from one forum to another to make a point.
Maybe a person feels comfortable sharing something with people on one site they would not feel happy with sharing on another.....the fact that it's an open site and the photo can be seen by all makes no difference imo.

However, I think you are in the minority. After all, pulling stuff off of another site is what Google is all about.

I just think this place is better when we allow one another to share what they want to share about who they are, and don't take it upon ourselves to "expose" other members.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:I don't yet know either of the two mentioned, but personally I feel it's wrong when people drag things, especially photos over from one forum to another to make a point.
Maybe a person feels comfortable sharing something with people on one site they would not feel happy with sharing on another.....the fact that it's an open site and the photo can be seen by all makes no difference imo.

However, I think you are in the minority.  After all, pulling stuff off of another site is what Google is all about.

I don't think Syl is in a minority, and the rules were broken. That rule was made in July 2014 because JD and/or Phil were doxing someone on here by posting stuff about them that they'd seen on another forum.

eddie wrote:To clarify:
Didge and sassy got into a debate and sassy posted up a link which claimed to be didge on another site.
The link has since been removed

Didge reported sassy.

Sassy claims there is nothing wrong in posting a link that is on a public domain for anyone to find.
Didge claims it isn't him anyway but that it's against the rules to dox someone.

And that's it. In a nutshell.

Didge has left because Ben has taken the decision not to "punish" sassy and feels it unfair, and yes, sassy is away for a few days.

I didn't see a link, I just saw a reference to a photo of Didge being on another site, and the name of the site. That happened several days ago though, and Didge complained at the time on the thread about schools banning religion. How come nothing was said then?

Didge is an annoying person, and I've been getting on better with Sassy lately, but if he wasn't happy with personal stuff being brought here, should it not have been dealt with at the time? If someone tried to dox me on here, I'd like to think that admin would do something about it.

I wasn't online and the complaint made by didge, was made to Ben only.
There was a link and it's since been removed by me.
I should've taken the link off the day I learned of it but I think it was late the next day when I realised the link was still there.

As to the rest of your wonderings, I can't answer them.

eddie wrote:I wasn't online and the complaint made by didge, was made to Ben only.
There was a link and it's since been removed by me.
I should've taken the link off the day I learned of it but I think it was late the next day when I realised the link was still there.

As to the rest of your wonderings, I can't answer them.

I responded as soon as I saw the complaint from Didge by locking and hiding the thread. I wanted to be able to look at what had been done while taking the link and the thread out of view for non-admins.

It's possible that you thought it was still up because you could still see it, but you have access to threads that most users don't.

Just for any users who may be curious, we do have a "Hidden Threads" section where we can put threads that might need to be referenced again in terms of deciding on whether a rule has been broken.

Oh, there was a different thread which was removed? I saw a reference to the photo of Didge in a thread last week, and it's still there.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:I wasn't online and the complaint made by didge, was made to Ben only.
There was a link and it's since been removed by me.
I should've taken the link off the day I learned of it but I think it was late the next day when I realised the link was still there.

As to the rest of your wonderings, I can't answer them.

I responded as soon as I saw the complaint from Didge by locking and hiding the thread. I wanted to be able to look at what had been done while taking the link and the thread out of view for non-admins.

It's possible that you thought it was still up because you could still see it, but you have access to threads that most users don't.

Just for any users who may be curious, we do have a "Hidden Threads" section where we can put threads that might need to be referenced again in terms of deciding on whether a rule has been broken.

Ah apologies. I followed your link in the admin panel and didn't even see the forum it was in, didn't realise it was in the hidden section.

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh, there was a different thread which was removed? I saw a reference to the photo of Didge in a thread last week, and it's still there.

Can you PM me the link to the thread please?
Haven't got time to trawl through everything

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

However, I think you are in the minority.  After all, pulling stuff off of another site is what Google is all about.

I don't think Syl is in a minority, and the rules were broken. That rule was made in July 2014 because JD and/or Phil were doxing someone on here by posting stuff about them that they'd seen on another forum.

I think you are right: that doxing is not popular. And nobody likes it when it happens to him or her. On the other hand, we all frown upon censorship.

But it's like freedom of speech vs. invasion of privacy. We all hate censorship; yet we don't want our lives intruded upon. The question is, at what point does the one become the other?

This ultimately goes to the motives of the speaker. Is s/he trying to bring up something of public interest and/or necessity, or is s/he trying to further a personal agenda? Both freedom to speak and privacy have a general and an individual side. We all want to be unfettered in what we say, and we all want to get undressed alone. But we also want to shut someone up when speaking ill about us, and we often want to expose wrongdoing. So the question is, does the speaker have a general interest to further, or is it a private matter?

You can point to one, and you can point to the other...and both are right. It just depends on the circumstances. Are you trying to promote a general interest, or just tear someone down?

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh, there was a different thread which was removed? I saw a reference to the photo of Didge in a thread last week, and it's still there.

Can you PM me the link to the thread please?
Haven't got time to trawl through everything

Will do.

Some people get worried about people knowing what they look like or where they're from or whatever.

I guess it's just not nice to feel "outed"

Saying that, someone did that to sassy recently if I recall?

eddie wrote:Some people get worried about people knowing what they look like or where they're from or whatever.

I guess it's just not nice to feel "outed"

Saying that, someone did that to sassy recently if I recall?

I don't remember that happening, though I think HF tried to provoke her with a few things he posted.

Bottom line is that I can't live on this site, I have a lot of other things I have to do. No admin should be expected to make policing a forum their full-time occupation.

That's why we continue to ask people to act like grownups here. The problem with that is that people never realize that they're not

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Some people get worried about people knowing what they look like or where they're from or whatever.

I guess it's just not nice to feel "outed"

Saying that, someone did that to sassy recently if I recall?

I don't remember that happening, though I think HF tried to provoke her with a few things he posted.

Bottom line is that I can't live on this site, I have a lot of other things I have to do. No admin should be expected to make policing a forum their full-time occupation.

That's why we continue to ask people to act like grownups here. The problem with that is that people never realize that they're not

Sassy also made a reference to where HF lives though. I remember discussing that issue at the time.

eddie wrote:Some people get worried about people knowing what they look like or where they're from or whatever.

I guess it's just not nice to feel "outed"

Saying that, someone did that to sassy recently if I recall?

Oh, in that video?

Sassy has put her own photo on here, so that's maybe a bit different. She did object though, and it was dealt with, which was the right thing.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:Some people get worried about people knowing what they look like or where they're from or whatever.

I guess it's just not nice to feel "outed"

Saying that, someone did that to sassy recently if I recall?

Oh, in that video?

Sassy has put her own photo on here, so that's maybe a bit different. She did object though, and it was dealt with, which was the right thing.

Yes that's correct

I'd put my photo up, but it's got a number under it!

eddie wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Oh, in that video?

Sassy has put her own photo on here, so that's maybe a bit different. She did object though, and it was dealt with, which was the right thing.

Yes that's correct

Some people do put their photo out there, but I just think that if someone else posts it, or links to it or whatever, they are entitled to object. That also goes for any info about them which is in the "public domain" - a common excuse which is used when doxing someone.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:

Yes that's correct

Some people do put their photo out there, but I just think that if someone else posts it, or links to it or whatever, they are entitled to object. That also goes for any info about them which is in the "public domain" - a common excuse which is used when doxing someone.

Well but...wouldn't that go for any news story that we discuss every day here...or many days, for some stories?  Someone's name...some incident...off we go.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Some people do put their photo out there, but I just think that if someone else posts it, or links to it or whatever, they are entitled to object. That also goes for any info about them which is in the "public domain" - a common excuse which is used when doxing someone.

Well but...wouldn't that go for any news story that we discuss every day here...or many days, for some stories?  Someone's name...some incident...off we go.

No, it's not the same thing at all. I don't think Mr Cameron, etc, will be joining this forum any time soon.

AS far as I can recall the You Tube video thread was put in the basement and the video deleted..............

only to be followed by a later video which was exactly the same but wiith the face faded out. But we still knew who it was. Can't remember what happened about that one.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well but...wouldn't that go for any news story that we discuss every day here...or many days, for some stories?  Someone's name...some incident...off we go.

No, it's not the same thing at all. I don't think Mr Cameron, etc, will be joining this forum any time soon.

So, if anybody on this forum was in the news, it would be against the rules to bring it up...or at least post it?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, it's not the same thing at all. I don't think Mr Cameron, etc, will be joining this forum any time soon.

So, if anybody on this forum was in the news, it would be against the rules to bring it up...or at least post it?

I doubt we'd know they were in the news unless they said so. I don't know the real names of most of the people on this forum - do you?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

So, if anybody on this forum was in the news, it would be against the rules to bring it up...or at least post it?

I doubt we'd know they were in the news unless they said so. I don't know the real names of most of the people on this forum - do you?

Some. Again, I'm only asking to play devil's advocate. I'm not taking sides.

I think you side-stepped the question. The question was, if someone on here were newsworthy, would it be taboo to speak of it? You avoided the question by claiming it would never come up. What if it did? I know some people by name. Sassy knows a lot of names. Some people even meet outside of the board. Does that matter?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I doubt we'd know they were in the news unless they said so. I don't know the real names of most of the people on this forum - do you?

Some.  Again, I'm only asking to play devil's advocate.  I'm not taking sides.

I think you side-stepped the question.  The question was, if someone on here were newsworthy, would it be taboo to speak of it?  You avoided the question by claiming it would never come up.  What if it did?  I know some people by name.  Sassy knows a lot of names.  Some people even meet outside of the board.  Does that matter?  

I think it would depend on the nature of the posts about such a person. If people used the situation out of context in order to abuse the person, I don't think that's appropriate. If they were just interested generally, that would be OK, as long as the person was happy to discuss it.

As to the actual rules, you'd have to ask admin what the rule is about posting such links without the member's permission.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Some.  Again, I'm only asking to play devil's advocate.  I'm not taking sides.

I think you side-stepped the question.  The question was, if someone on here were newsworthy, would it be taboo to speak of it?  You avoided the question by claiming it would never come up.  What if it did?  I know some people by name.  Sassy knows a lot of names.  Some people even meet outside of the board.  Does that matter?  

I think it would depend on the nature of the posts about such a person. If people used the situation out of context in order to abuse the person, I don't think that's appropriate. If they were just interested generally, that would be OK, as long as the person was happy to discuss it.

As to the actual rules, you'd have to ask admin what the rule is about posting such links without the member's permission.

I agree. As I said elsewhere, it really depends on someone's motive. If it's newsworthy independent of any personal relationship, then there is an independent basis for interest. However, if it's just to embarrass the individual, then it's same ole', same ole'.

Inever knew he was Phildidge, I should have guessed it by that name, but then again I am a bit thick.

Oh well you live and learn!

These are not things that you haven't done yourself, sassy. Didge is an excitable type guy, and you know that any time you get into it with him it will go on for an infinity.

What you need with someone like that is a file of 'exit strategies', things that leave your point intact, yet excuse you from returning.