FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: Shane for Wax on August 28, 2013, 02:15:23 pm
-
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/28/justice/montana-teacher-rape-sentence/
A mother in Montana is outraged that a high school teacher who admitted raping her 14-year-old daughter received only a month in prison, while her daughter took her own life.
"I think this sentence is a joke, a travesty," the mother, Auliea Hanlon, told CNN on Tuesday night, a day after the sentencing.
"People will lose faith in our justice system. I have."
Hanlon said she was particularly upset that the sentencing judge, G. Todd Baugh, said her daughter "seemed older than her chronological age" and was "as much in control of the situation" as the teacher.
Baugh later acknowledged to CNN that "that was not the best choice of words."
Yeah oh, and--
As the case wound its way through the legal system, the girl committed suicide. She was a few weeks shy of her 17th birthday.
-
How the...what the....Dafuq did I just read?! He's a teacher, he has control over her, in what world does her maturity play into coercion like that?
-
Colony drop on Montana. Right the fuck now.
-
Colony drop on Montana. Right the fuck now.
I think a bombardment with phaser cannons should do the trick. Let's just glass the region.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/17e42c4186faa3bd194e4eb9eca19d73/tumblr_mpx2nkebDQ1rd80hmo4_r1_250.gif)
...Seriously though, I am apalled. Rambold violated the original agreement he had gotten in exhange of charges being dropped and then they still give him just a slap on the wrists.
-
Well, this is infuriating.
-
.....RAPE! AHHHHH!
Ironbite-AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
-
If it's any comfort to contemplate; wait and see the lynch mob outside Yellowstone Country Jail on his release day. And even if no lynch mob materializes, Rambold is not long for this earth. Somebody will get to him.
-
Oh Montana...don't act this way. :/
-
You know, I've been up to that area of the country before. There's a lot of wilderness area where humans haven't visited in years, if ever. Seems like it'd be real easy to make something disappear in to those wilds. Last I checked, Montana is about as much cowboy country as Oklahoma is, an 'round these parts at least, we aren't afraid of breaking out some old-school justice like they did back in the day.
Also, ain't there a lot of moose and bears up there? Wonder if we can tranq' a moose long enough to tie this guy to it's antlers and then let it run free in the woods.
-
You know, I've been up to that area of the country before. There's a lot of wilderness area where humans haven't visited in years, if ever. Seems like it'd be real easy to make something disappear in to those wilds. Last I checked, Montana is about as much cowboy country as Oklahoma is, an 'round these parts at least, we aren't afraid of breaking out some old-school justice like they did back in the day.
Also, ain't there a lot of moose and bears up there? Wonder if we can tranq' a moose long enough to tie this guy to it's antlers and then let it run free in the woods.
Go right ahead. I'm not even going to pretend I consider this wrong, and as far as I am concerned, anyone on this rapist's side can join him.
-
This meant that all charges against Rambold would be dismissed if he completed a sex offender treatment program and met other requirements. One of them was to have no contact with children.
Rambold admitted to one of the rape charges. But Rambold fell short of the agreement.
"He had some contacts with nieces and nephews in a family setting and other adults were present," Baugh said.
He also had relationships with women that he didn't tell his counselors about.
"That is a violation from his deferred prosecution so he was dropped from the plan."
They only gave this monster DAYS in prison? Life! No fuck that death is the correct course of action since he has resisted treatment!
-
I agree with TIM.
-
Say, does Montana have a Stand Your Ground-type law? Everyone with access to this story now has reasonable cause to believe that this fucker will, if given the chance, rape them or their children. The outcome, I'm sure, is something anyone with a half-functioning brain could guess, and not a fuck will be given on that day.
-
Say, does Montana have a Stand Your Ground-type law? Everyone with access to this story now has reasonable cause to believe that this fucker will, if given the chance, rape them or their children. The outcome, I'm sure, is something anyone with a half-functioning brain could guess, and not a fuck will be given on that day.
Even if they do, this guy's white, so it wouldn't really apply.
-
she was 17, not 14... and she committed suicide 3 years later that may or may not be directly related to the CONSENSUAL sex she had with the teacher! There was NO rape and NO murder!
Apparently, teenagers in this country are treated as stupid and immature and don't know want they want or how how life works, unless it's sex with someone who's over three times their own age and in a position of authority. In that case they knew exactly what they were doing and need to be treated like they were adults and take full responsibility. The actual adults in the situation are apparently powerless to resist these little seducing harlots and suffer enough simply by being outcasted and losing everything.
-
These people are the reason I can't own firearms.
-
"People will lose faith in our justice system. I have."
Too fucking right. And when the justice system doesn't work, it's up to good old vigilantism to fill the void. Here's hoping this guy is killed slowly and painfully in the very near future.
-
"People will lose faith in our justice system. I have."
Too fucking right. And when the justice system doesn't work, it's up to good old vigilantism to fill the void. Here's hoping this guy is killed slowly and painfully in the very near future.
Times like this make me wish Jacket from Hotline Miami were real, and decided to turn vigilante. He can take out the entire Russian mob and an entire police station, I think he can handle a few kiddie fiddlers.
-
So who wants to drop a colony on Montana?
-
I'm down with that.
-
the sentencing judge, G. Todd Baugh
Gaah...I have Baughs in my family tree....I hope to whatever higher powers there are I'm not related to his piece of buffalo jizm. It's bad enough already that he's supposedly considered the same species as I am.
-
Hang the teacher. And hang the judge. For murder.
-
"People will lose faith in our justice system. I have."
Too fucking right. And when the justice system doesn't work, it's up to good old vigilantism to fill the void. Here's hoping this guy is killed slowly and painfully in the very near future.
Yeah, good idea, let's let the people with hero complexes dole out justice for everyone. That sounds FANTASTIC.
Hang the teacher. And hang the judge. For murder.
I'd prefer to lock them in a hole in the ground for the rest of their miserable lives. [/comedic hypocrisy]
-
Hang the teacher. And hang the judge. For murder.
I still prefer Vlad-style.
-
We can impale them, actually. I'm personally a fan of displaying the bodies.
-
We can impale them, actually. I'm personally a fan of displaying the bodies.
Yeah, but Vlad perfected it so they died of dehydration and starvation. I would take it one step beyond. Hook them up to an IV system so they don't die, but they're stuck there, naked, with sticks up their ass coming out their mouths.
-
Rev up the hate machine because the judge just doubled down on the derp complete with non-apology!!
A Montana judge apologized but said he had no plans to resign after his remarks about a 14-year-old rape victim – and the 30-day jail sentence he handed the perpetrator – sparked outrage.
The case involves a 54-year-old former teacher who raped the teen, who later committed suicide.
District Judge G. Todd Baugh said Wednesday he "deserved to be chastised" for his comments about the victim, who he had said was "older than her chronological age" and had as much control of the situation as the Billings Senior High School teacher who was in a sexual relationship with her.
Baugh, 71, said he stood by his decision Monday to sentence the former teacher, Stacey Rambold, to 15 years in prison, with all of but 31 days of that term suspended. He gave Rambold credit for one day already served.
Baugh, 71, wrote an apology Wednesday in a letter to the editor to the Billings Gazette. He said his comments were demeaning of all women and not reflective of his beliefs.
The judge later told reporters he was "fumbling around" in court trying to explain his sentence and "made some really stupid remarks." (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20729497,00.html)
-
Rev up the hate machine because the judge just doubled down on the derp complete with non-apology!!
he "deserved to be chastised" for his comments about the victim (http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20729497,00.html)
He "deserves to be chastised"?!? No, someone who says "that's so gay" deserves to be chastised. This dumbfuck deserves to have white-hot metal rods forcefully inserted into every orifice.
-
He also deserves this.
[NOPE]
-
He also deserves this.
Ironbite-I think you guys know what to do.
Impressive.
-
No doxxing. Even if he is an asshole.
-
Too bad that's the number for his office. You know. The one that's up for anyone's perusal because it's public.
Ironbite-wanna try again?
-
Then anyone who wishes to peruse can do so wherever it is available. Not here.
-
Then anyone who wishes to peruse can do so wherever it is available. Not here.
It was available here, until you deleted it.
-
"People will lose faith in our justice system. I have."
Too fucking right. And when the justice system doesn't work, it's up to good old vigilantism to fill the void. Here's hoping this guy is killed slowly and painfully in the very near future.
Yeah, good idea, let's let the people with hero complexes dole out justice for everyone. That sounds FANTASTIC.
I'll take it over a system were rapists are given a mere slap on the wrist.
-
Then anyone who wishes to peruse can do so wherever it is available. Not here.
It was available here, until you deleted it.
Exactly. Sigma, stop defending this guy. Why would you try to help him?
-
Then anyone who wishes to peruse can do so wherever it is available. Not here.
It was available here, until you deleted it.
Exactly. Sigma, stop defending this guy. Why would you try to help him?
It was deleted probably because it contravened board rules:
The Serious Stuff: Don't mess around with these. For many of them, violations will be cause for instant permabans.
...
Don't post other people's private information without their consent.
http://fqa.digibase.ca/index.php?topic=4764.0
-
The judge is a douchebag, but doxxing is still against the rules. Privacy of others has to be respected. If you really want to make it your own pet project to let him know why he's a shitty person, you can do it on a place besides this forum.
-
Hmm... perhaps I'll make a change.org petition to tell him to resign.
-
Folks don’t try vigilantism unless you have the resources and organization, this board offers neither. To be honest I am still a bit miffed about getting permabanned (I got better) over offsite content due the whole Love-shy incident and seek to prevent that from happening to everyone else.
"People will lose faith in our justice system. I have."
Too fucking right. And when the justice system doesn't work, it's up to good old vigilantism to fill the void. Here's hoping this guy is killed slowly and painfully in the very near future.
Vigilantism is not about justice, it is about causing harm to stop a greater harm. Best case scenario requires pinpoint accuracy, sacrificing ethics and living with the results. I can say and follow through with no empathy for the rapist, no empathy for those who support rapists not everyone can do so as well. Don’t be quick to assume you can too.
-
It's not private information, as Ironbite said.
Too bad that's the number for his office. You know. The one that's up for anyone's perusal because it's public.
Ironbite-wanna try again?
Ironbite is effectively--& I use the following term very loosely--organizing a perfectly legal protest against a rape apologizing judge, & you guys are attacking him for it because...well, actually, I don't know. Because it wasn't a guro-esque revenge fantasy?
-
It's against the rules, Lithp, even with publicly available information unless Sigma thinks otherwise, which apparently he doesn't.
-
Vigilantism is not about justice, it is about causing harm to stop a greater harm. Best case scenario requires pinpoint accuracy, sacrificing ethics and living with the results. I can say and follow through with no empathy for the rapist, no empathy for those who support rapists not everyone can do so as well. Don’t be quick to assume you can too.
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120310162437/theinternetbox/images/thumb/9/9b/Watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme.png/620px-Watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme.png)
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
Nobody is defending anybody. The forum administrator is enforcing the forum rules.
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
Nobody is defending anybody. The forum administrator is enforcing the forum rules.
It's been made clear that if a troll is fun, the rules can be bent to keep them around for laughs. Therefore, logically, if the rules can be bent for fun, they can be bent for pissing off a rape apologist.
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
Nobody is defending anybody. The forum administrator is enforcing the forum rules.
It's been made clear that if a troll is fun, the rules can be bent to keep them around for laughs. Therefore, logically, if the rules can be bent for fun, they can be bent for pissing off a rape apologist.
Trolls, from what I've noticed, are typically not posting things that fall under the "Serious Stuff" category in the rules.
Edited to add the best statement on following forum rules I have ever read (and which I have posted here before, when this same issue came up):
This board has certain rules. By forming an account here, you are agreeing to these rules and terms. Attempts to violate these rules, no matter what cloak of free speech and liberalism one attaches to it, is disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated. I do not agree with every rule on this board, but I follow it. That's because I'm an adult. If there's something you don't agree with or a rule you don't wish to follow, do it in literally the 99% of other venues that allow you do it online.
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
Nobody is defending anybody. The forum administrator is enforcing the forum rules.
It's been made clear that if a troll is fun, the rules can be bent to keep them around for laughs. Therefore, logically, if the rules can be bent for fun, they can be bent for pissing off a rape apologist.
Messing with a troll on the forum is not the same as using the forum to harass someone in real life (no matter how much they deserve it).
-
If we saw someone spreading the contact information for, say, a doctor who performs abortion on a pro-life forum, we'd call them complete assholes undeserving of sympathy.
Even if this guy is a first class asshole, that doesn't mean we need to sink to that level.
On a more practical note, if Sigma left the number up on the forum, it's possible he could be taken the court over the ensuing harassment as an accessory. I wouldn't want to risk that either.
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
Nobody is defending anybody. The forum administrator is enforcing the forum rules.
It's been made clear that if a troll is fun, the rules can be bent to keep them around for laughs. Therefore, logically, if the rules can be bent for fun, they can be bent for pissing off a rape apologist.
Messing with a troll on the forum is not the same as using the forum to harass someone in real life (no matter how much they deserve it).
That, and should anything illegal come of it, it can land the boards in general as well as Sigma himself in rather hot water. Bother the idiot on your own time if you must, but don't try to involve the rest of the forum.
Jack Mann beat me to it, it would seem.
-
I'm still not seeing any rule that was broken, except for frequent citations to the incorrect statement that private, personal information was posted.
If we saw someone spreading the contact information for, say, a doctor who performs abortion on a pro-life forum, we'd call them complete assholes undeserving of sympathy.
If the contact information was public, for use as a public service--IE the number for the clinic rather than his home number--then no, I wouldn't. And even if I did, it wouldn't be for posting the number. Thanks for trying, but I think it would be best if I spoke for myself from now on.
That, and should anything illegal come of it, it can land the boards in general as well as Sigma himself in rather hot water.
I think this kind of reasoning is rather sad. If we're that paranoid, then why don't we stop openly criticizing people at all? At any moment, someone could be "inspired" to cross the line into illegal, harassing behavior.
-
Exactly. It's public information. Spreading public information is not a crime.
-
I will say, I don't think that "defending a rape apologist" was very fair. It is technically true, but I don't believe Sigma fits the spirit of the phrase.
-
Well, all I see is Sigma defending a rape apologist.
Nobody is defending anybody. The forum administrator is enforcing the forum rules.
So much this. Can we give the poor guy at least six months before we have a lynch mob ready to chase yet another admin screaming into the night?
-
Exactly. It's public information. Spreading public information is not a crime.
Doesn't matter. Even if you're innocent, the costs of fighting a lawsuit in court can ruin you. Better to avoid the possibility.
-
Exactly. It's public information. Spreading public information is not a crime.
Irrelevant. Doxxing is doxxing, harassment is harassment, and if it were a pro-choice doctor's office information being posted on a pro-life website with the phrase "you know what to do", you would be calling it out, so don't fucking start with me you hypocrite, because you people are reminding me of the fucking far-right with how bloodthirsty you get.
Believe it or not, people are expected to have standards and act like adults. Two wrongs do not make a right, no matter how much you whine about "justice".
-
Doxxing is doxxing, harassment is harassment
I have not seen a single definition of doxxing that includes a public official's office contact number. The harassment claim is also dubious. You'd have a better case that we "cyber harass" Vox Day, or Cathy Brennan.
As someone said on HRG, would it be doxxing if we posted the number for the white house?
And the lawsuit reasoning is really hard to swallow, especially when you consider that this guy is already being reamed for his comments. You really think he's going to single out & sue every single group mentioned by an angry protestor calling him on his shit?
Edit: Also, I'm interested in hearing what Sigma has to say, but until then, if people are going to keep baselessly asserting that someone was doxxed, I'm going to keep saying that they are wrong.
-
Let's say an exception is made this time.
Nothing comes of it.
Next time this comes up, the case is made that it's not much different than this, and an exception is made again.
Repeat, and repeat, and repeat.
Eventually the range of allowed exceptions to the rule is broad enough that the rule might as well not be there, and then someone's personal information is posted, and that person does sue.
Better to keep a blanket ban.
(Incidentally, the last time this came up was over an address from a URL ownership report being posted.)
-
That's the slippery slope argument! And there's no exception because there was no doxxing. By your logic, we shouldn't be able to mention the existence of people outside of the forum, because "something might come of it," whatever that means.
-
Exactly. I don't like doxxing. I don't remember what thread, but there was a real example of doxxing, where someone's entire internet life was stalked down, including their mother, and that was disgusting. This is not doxxing. In fact, I can 100% prove to you this isn't illegal and Sigma CANNOT be sued. How? Change.org exists. They use the same information to send petitions all the time.
Exactly. It's public information. Spreading public information is not a crime.
Irrelevant. Doxxing is doxxing, harassment is harassment, and if it were a pro-choice doctor's office information being posted on a pro-life website with the phrase "you know what to do", you would be calling it out, so don't fucking start with me you hypocrite, because you people are reminding me of the fucking far-right with how bloodthirsty you get.
Believe it or not, people are expected to have standards and act like adults. Two wrongs do not make a right, no matter how much you whine about "justice".
This isn't two wrongs. This is non-violent protest. You're starting to remind me of the far-right when you call non-violent protest a wrong. That sounds like the kind of thing they would say: that we can't protest due to some sort of stability of the state bullshit.
-
Oh for goddess's sake. I have a mental breakdown and leave for a day and this shit happens?
Why the hell you're all getting your undies in a twist for the removal of a piece of address is beyond me. It's beyond ridiculous. You want to find your own little lynch mob you can do it outside of these forums. Guess what? I bet most of your addresses are in the phone book. Would I be able to post every single one of your addresses around the internet at my leisure cause it isn't really private information? What about if I go and find your entire history like people did with Anita Sarkeesian?
Why the hell not? Oh, right. Cause it's wrong no matter how public the information might be. Until such time as the guy comes on here and actually drops off his own address (as if we'd know it's really him anyways) then no, you can't 'do it for him'.
Also, PPH shut the fuck up with the us versus them and the fucking appeal to emotion. "That sounds like the kind of thing they would say" is the oldest phrase for causing a divide I've ever fucking heard.
Nobody is stopping anyone from finding the information on their own time outside of the forums. So getting all pissy over it being removed from the forums is ridiculous and isn't some fascist type of behavior on the part of the staff.
-
Oh for goddess's sake. I have a mental breakdown and leave for a day and this shit happens?
Why the hell you're all getting your undies in a twist for the removal of a piece of address is beyond me. It's beyond ridiculous. You want to find your own little lynch mob you can do it outside of these forums. Guess what? I bet most of your addresses are in the phone book. Would I be able to post every single one of your addresses around the internet at my leisure cause it isn't really private information? What about if I go and find your entire history like people did with Anita Sarkeesian?
Why the hell not? Oh, right. Cause it's wrong no matter how public the information might be. Until such time as the guy comes on here and actually drops off his own address (as if we'd know it's really him anyways) then no, you can't 'do it for him'.
Also, PPH shut the fuck up with the us versus them and the fucking appeal to emotion. "That sounds like the kind of thing they would say" is the oldest phrase for causing a divide I've ever fucking heard.
Nobody is stopping anyone from finding the information on their own time outside of the forums. So getting all pissy over it being removed from the forums is ridiculous and isn't some fascist type of behavior on the part of the staff.
I said it because he said it. Or are you conveniently forgetting the part where he said it? Let me help you remember.
Exactly. It's public information. Spreading public information is not a crime.
Irrelevant. Doxxing is doxxing, harassment is harassment, and if it were a pro-choice doctor's office information being posted on a pro-life website with the phrase "you know what to do", you would be calling it out, so don't fucking start with me you hypocrite, because you people are reminding me of the fucking far-right with how bloodthirsty you get.
Believe it or not, people are expected to have standards and act like adults. Two wrongs do not make a right, no matter how much you whine about "justice".
Hopefully that is visible enough. As I said before, there is a major difference between the Anita thing and this. This is a public official, repeat, a public official, which is someone who is supposed to look out for the common good, not doing his goddamn job. This is public information. And, first off, my address isn't in the phone book (and not just because I haven't had a house phone in almost a decade). Secondly, they give those things out as if they have nothing better to do than waste paper. So, anyone who is in there has their information quite available. However, even then, it's not the same. For some fucking reason, I don't think the judge lives at work. Call it a hunch.
-
So now we're going with the 'but he said it first'. Even tho this isn't the first time you've used such phrases and tried many times to appeal to emotion for things you don't agree with? Even tho you don't have to do a tit-for-tat? Then again...
I really don't care if it's public information. Once again, still wrong. Once again, you can go ahead and find the information on your own. Nobody is stopping you. In the time it takes to type up the fifty billion posts that are made here you could have the information you want and are bitching about the removal of. It's a really ridiculous thing to go yelling about 'defense of a rape apologist'. Then again, it's not the first time I've seen people get all riled up over such things. And it won't be the last.
I really do think you could find better use of your time instead of complaining about the fact that a piece of information, that, if it is as public as you say it is you can find easily.
But hey, whatever. I'm at that point where I simply don't care. I'm just getting sick of people trying to divide themselves from others.
-
So now we're going with the 'but he said it first'. Even tho this isn't the first time you've used such phrases and tried many times to appeal to emotion for things you don't agree with? Even tho you don't have to do a tit-for-tat? Then again...
I really don't care if it's public information. Once again, still wrong. Once again, you can go ahead and find the information on your own. Nobody is stopping you. In the time it takes to type up the fifty billion posts that are made here you could have the information you want and are bitching about the removal of. It's a really ridiculous thing to go yelling about 'defense of a rape apologist'. Then again, it's not the first time I've seen people get all riled up over such things. And it won't be the last.
I really do think you could find better use of your time instead of complaining about the fact that a piece of information, that, if it is as public as you say it is you can find easily.
But hey, whatever. I'm at that point where I simply don't care. I'm just getting sick of people trying to divide themselves from others.
It's as wrong as any other public protest. Also, too much unity is much more awful. If everyone's the same, there's no point in anything. And my point is, you only attack that statement when it's made by someone you disagree with. That is called being a hypocrite.
-
...Sure, a public protest. Except not really.
And yeah, okay. Attack me instead of the words. That works too. Except not.
P.S. That word 'hypocrite' doesn't mean what you think it means.
-
If you want to harass the judge and want to communicate any "necessary information" to people you might feel are interested...then PM them. Take it to emails, instant messages, Skype, hell you can take it to a party in a MMORPG for all I care. This is a public forum, anyone can find this information. Its not some super-secret club that you have to know a special handshake before we let you in; this board in particular is totally public, you don't even need to register to see it.
It doesn't matter if its his work number, his cellphone, or the number to some secret communicator watch he keeps hidden up his bum, you don't disseminate that information and add to it the line "you know what to do." That, my friend, can be construed as a threat of, if nothing else, harassment. That is a crime and that could get these boards shut the fuck down. We just avoided losing the place entirely, I can understand Sigma not wanting to take a chance with that shit so soon afterward, or did you forget Distind saying we should be grateful that he didn't just destroy the forum outright?
As for Sigma being a "rape apologist" or whatever; bitches, please. He's not apologizing for what the judge did, he's trying to keep this forum from being shut down for collusion in criminal activities. Big bloody difference, you bellends. Don't get me wrong, if the judge gets harassed to hell and back, I highly doubt anyone here would bat an eye, he deserves it. But harassment is still a crime, and spreading information with the intent of causing said harassment is also a crime to which this board could be deemed complicit. Its a world of bloody difference between saying that Kathy Brennan or Vox Day needs a good brick upside the head and actually giving out contact information, no matter how public it may be, to someone with the express intent of encouraging others to commit criminal harassment.
You guys are supposed to be smarter than this, especially Ironbite, since he's been here a pretty long damned time. I'd assumed most of us here knew and understood that, in the US (where this judge is), harassment can be considered a criminal offense, even if its done online. Know your laws and understand them. I don't pretend to know all of them by heart, but I do know that what Ironbite encouraged was nothing short of criminal harassment of a judge. Sigma wasn't protecting the judge from harassment, Sigma was protecting this board from being shut down for being found guilty of being accessories to a crime.
-
I don't think any emails telling him he is a bad person is harassment. If so, how is change.org not shut down? They do this en masse all the time. It's what they exist to do. Perhaps if it was an unproven thing I could understand this level of paranoia, but a big-name website exists to mass-email people to scold them and has not once gotten in trouble, despite most of the people they go after being politicians and rich assholes.
-
what ravy said, also, this rampant antagonizing is getting old real fast. i'd say that ibby should know better, but it's not his style by a long shot. but can we please stop derailing threads just to settle some epeen point? i like it here as most here are quite cultivated and reasonable. no sense keeping up the hate...
oh, and i'm behind sigma 100%. this forum > trolling bigots with potential legal repercussions
@PHH: actually, that is legitimately considered harassment if done sufficiently. hate mail has quite a bit of jurisprudence attached to it...
-
So, over 100,000 emails is not harassment? Because change.org reaches those numbers sometimes. Therefore, I highly doubt the two or three he'd get from here is harassment.
-
no sense keeping up the hate...
Pssh, you know you got more hate in you than a Good Ol Boy who complains about the War of Northern Aggression.
-
no sense keeping up the hate...
Pssh, you know you got more hate in you than a Good Ol Boy who complains about the War of Northern Aggression.
the difference is i keep that hatred in check until i play guitar or video games, i like my world and my discussions civil ;)
also, awesome simile!
-
no sense keeping up the hate...
Pssh, you know you got more hate in you than a Good Ol Boy who complains about the War of Northern Aggression.
the difference is i keep that hatred in check until i play guitar or video games, i like my world and my discussions civil ;)
also, awesome simile!
I second the "awesome simile". It was pretty epic.
-
I bet most of your addresses are in the phone book. Would I be able to post every single one of your addresses around the internet at my leisure cause it isn't really private information? Why the hell not?
Because it's personal identifying information, which is the definition of "doxxing," which I actually looked up, because everyone was just namedropping it. I haven't seen any reference in any of these definitions to numbers for businesses, public offices, etc.
Why the hell you're all getting your undies in a twist for the removal of a piece of address is beyond me.
I said on Day 1 that I was concerned about the rules being liberally interpreted, that's why. That remains my concern, I'm not actually planning to take Ironbite's advice, however with that said, this reasoning can easily be taken to the extreme that Ironbite can't suggest contacting him at all, which would be a needless limit on efficacy. Anyway, the site has noticeably improved since Distind stepped down, but he wasn't the source of all of its problems, you know. There are other things that I would hope to be addressed, such as this kind of thinking:
I can understand Sigma not wanting to take a chance with that shit so soon afterward, or did you forget Distind saying we should be grateful that he didn't just destroy the forum outright?
This is something I've seen crop up a lot on these boards for a while now. After the split, people were deathly afraid of having or talking about drama, for instance. Another thing is this scapegoating bullshit. It's not just Ironbite, myself, & PHH that "did this." We are only responding to claims that are being made, & I definitely criticized PHH when I felt he stepped out of line. You want to talk about "us vs. them" reasoning, fair enough, but maybe the board has been unconsciously fostering it for a while now.
Its a world of bloody difference between saying that Kathy Brennan or Vox Day needs a good brick upside the head
Lol no it isn't. The paranoid reasoning you're giving me has no resemblance to the reality of the situation. Calling a judge to bitch him out about a comment is precisely as "harassing" as saying that Cathy Brennan "needs a good brick upside his head," which is also MUCH more immediately threatening as a comment. And it's no accident that I picked her as an example, either. That's her full name, that actually IS personal identifying information. According to you, shouldn't I only refer to her as "bugbrennan," even though she fucking hands her name & sometimes her number out--unless she's done it HERE? That's one of the things I'm criticizing, actually. You people aren't fucking reading shit, you're just repeating points that clear critiques have been expressed on, & not actually showing that the critiques are wrong.
-
@Lithp: I've said my piece. If others feel the need or desire to expound upon them, they're more than welcome to. As for me, I got more important shit to do.
@Guiznode + PHH: I'll be here all week! After that, you fuckers are on your own.
-
Lithp I specifically didn't mention doxxing.
Other than that, I said all I need to. So yeah.
-
Its a world of bloody difference between saying that Kathy Brennan or Vox Day needs a good brick upside the head
Lol no it isn't. The paranoid reasoning you're giving me has no resemblance to the reality of the situation. Calling a judge to bitch him out about a comment is precisely as "harassing" as saying that Cathy Brennan "needs a good brick upside his head," which is also MUCH more immediately threatening as a comment. And it's no accident that I picked her as an example, either. That's her full name, that actually IS personal identifying information. According to you, shouldn't I only refer to her as "bugbrennan," even though she fucking hands her name & sometimes her number out--unless she's done it HERE? That's one of the things I'm criticizing, actually. You people aren't fucking reading shit, you're just repeating points that clear critiques have been expressed on, & not actually showing that the critiques are wrong.
Ahem...
Its a world of bloody difference between saying that Kathy Brennan or Vox Day needs a good brick upside the head and actually giving out contact information, no matter how public it may be, to someone with the express intent of encouraging others to commit criminal harassment.
Don't quote mine.
Anyway, I really do think there is a difference between bitching about random asshole X online and posting his phonenumber with the added note of "here's his number, so harass him maybe?"
And even if in this particular case that particular information wasn't illegal to spread, I'm not fond of suggestions of harassing people. Well, maybe if there is a "contact your politician" adresses or numbers because then the people of the region certainly have a right to voice their displeasure with the asshole.
-
I can understand Sigma not wanting to take a chance with that shit so soon afterward, or did you forget Distind saying we should be grateful that he didn't just destroy the forum outright?
This is something I've seen crop up a lot on these boards for a while now. After the split, people were deathly afraid of having or talking about drama, for instance. Another thing is this scapegoating bullshit. It's not just Ironbite, myself, & PHH that "did this." We are only responding to claims that are being made, & I definitely criticized PHH when I felt he stepped out of line. You want to talk about "us vs. them" reasoning, fair enough, but maybe the board has been unconsciously fostering it for a while now.
And, I just wanna say something here. I don't mind people disagreeing with me. I don't know what people think about me, but despite the disagreements I've had with people on here, I still respect you all. There's only one member other than trolls I've hated, and that's Distind.
-
The teacher is a rapist, and the judge is an ass and unworthy of his position, but there is such a thing as the rule of law. You say the law has failed? Okay, screw the law, let's form a lynch mob. That's sure going to be constructive and set a good precedent.[/sarcasm]
The judicial process failing for Cherice does not justify removing Baugh's right of process (or disciplinary action in our case). Which is what doxxing him implicitly calls for, calling to take matters into their own hands. A petition is something different, in that it only calls for action by the authority, but does not act itself bypassing proper authority. I fully support petitioning his oversight to take a look at him.
An anarchist is going to disagree with several things of what I've said. I acknowledge this, and I'll freely admit there are cases where their position not only has merit, but is considered preferable by me. This is not one of them.
despite the disagreements I've had with people on here, I still respect you all.
That's good :) But please then, stop sensationalizing the actions of people you respect. ("defending a rapist")
-
The teacher is a rapist, and the judge is an ass and unworthy of his position, but there is such a thing as the rule of law. You say the law has failed? Okay, screw the law, let's form a lynch mob. That's sure going to be constructive and set a good precedent.[/sarcasm]
The judicial process failing for Cherice does not justify removing Baugh's right of process (or disciplinary action in our case). Which is what doxxing him implicitly calls for, calling to take matters into their own hands. A petition is something different, in that it only calls for action by the authority, but does not act itself bypassing proper authority. I fully support petitioning his oversight to take a look at him.
An anarchist is going to disagree with several things of what I've said. I acknowledge this, and I'll freely admit there are cases where their position not only has merit, but is considered preferable by me. This is not one of them.
despite the disagreements I've had with people on here, I still respect you all.
That's good :) But please then, stop sensationalizing the actions of people you respect. ("defending a rapist")
Sorry, those things are more kneejerk reaction than I like to admit. I get worked up and post my first thoughts, and don't enjoy trying to take them back. I think it's not doxxing, and I think that a petition would target him to step down anyways, but I understand the logic of others, although I believe it is flawed and has holes.
-
Don't quote mine.
I didn't. That didn't actually change the content of the conversation, & I specifically mentioned that "Cathy Brennan" IS contact information. Unless you're talking about the omission of some variant of "go get 'em," which I think is kind of nit picky.
Otherwise, fine by me. I really didn't expect this to get so crazy before Sigma even responded to the topic.
-
Again:
This board has certain rules. By forming an account here, you are agreeing to these rules and terms. Attempts to violate these rules, no matter what cloak of free speech and liberalism one attaches to it, is disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated. I do not agree with every rule on this board, but I follow it. That's because I'm an adult. If there's something you don't agree with or a rule you don't wish to follow, do it in literally the 99% of other venues that allow you do it online.
-
Again:
This board has certain rules. By forming an account here, you are agreeing to these rules and terms. Attempts to violate these rules, no matter what cloak of free speech and liberalism one attaches to it, is disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated. I do not agree with every rule on this board, but I follow it. That's because I'm an adult. If there's something you don't agree with or a rule you don't wish to follow, do it in literally the 99% of other venues that allow you do it online.
And if we disagree that it is "disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated"?
-
Again:
This board has certain rules. By forming an account here, you are agreeing to these rules and terms. Attempts to violate these rules, no matter what cloak of free speech and liberalism one attaches to it, is disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated. I do not agree with every rule on this board, but I follow it. That's because I'm an adult. If there's something you don't agree with or a rule you don't wish to follow, do it in literally the 99% of other venues that allow you do it online.
And if we disagree that it is "disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated"?
That what is? What was done was adjudged to be in violation of the board rules by the forum administrator. Violating the board rules is what is "disrespectful, rude, foolish and must not be tolerated".
-
Again:
This board has certain rules. By forming an account here, you are agreeing to these rules and terms. Attempts to violate these rules, no matter what cloak of free speech and liberalism one attaches to it, is disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated. I do not agree with every rule on this board, but I follow it. That's because I'm an adult. If there's something you don't agree with or a rule you don't wish to follow, do it in literally the 99% of other venues that allow you do it online.
And if we disagree that it is "disrespectful, rude, foolish, and must not be tolerated"?
That what is? What was done was adjudged to be in violation of the board rules by the forum administrator. Violating the board rules is what is "disrespectful, rude, foolish and must not be tolerated".
No, it's an opinion that it is those.
-
Guys while it's sweet of ya'll to fight my battles for me....knock it the fuck off.
I was wrong with posting the information and then ending it with a "you know what to do." Had I specifically instructed you guys to call and write in letters detailing how stupid this judge's decision is then I'd have a leg to stand on. As is, I didn't. I know this now.
Ironbite-now can we get back on topic or am I gonna have to drop a pipebomb again?
-
Jesus fucking Christ, I should've checked this thread when I had a chance to log in earlier today.
When I first removed the information from Ironbite's post, I mistakenly believed it was private information, which is why I described it as doxxing. Later I realised (because Ironbite pointed it out) that it was his office number, which is less serious, but still a problem. Why? Because posting someone's phone number, in a thread such as this one, is an invitation to a harassment campaign. An FQA-organised harassment campaign. Regardless of legality, I'm very much uncomfortable with that notion. I don't want FQA to function as a platform for that sort of thing.
Arguing about whether this is technically covered in The Rules under private information is a red herring. I made it clear on day one that I will interpret the rules as loosely or strictly as I deem it appropriate for the situation at hand, and in this case I ruled that posting the judge's office number falls under the spirit of 'no doxxing'. You are, as always, welcome to discuss whether this is the correct decision to make. But "The text of the rules should be interpreted this way" is not an argument I will find very convincing. "You are wrong to ban FQA-organised harassment campaigns against assholes" might be, if you can defend it adequately.
I will also remark that I think Ironbite made an honest mistake and there were no repercussions beyond editing out the information.
Finally, as for the notion that I'm defending a rape apologist: I will plead guilty to defending him from getting phone calls by people who found his number in this forum. Not much more.
-
I have to ask, what do you think calling and bitching at him, or more likely, his secretary, would actually do?
-
Guys while it's sweet of ya'll to fight my battles for me....knock it the fuck off.
You're welcome, but I actually wasn't. Much like I haven't actually been arguing with Sigma all of this time, just a few other members,& I wasn't sure if their claims were related to Sigma's or independent. If I'm going to stick around, I want to keep an eye on how things are working around here. Many things have changed since I've been away, & they've changed again since I've got back, but I'm still not sure what or how.
It really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that I'm still very dubious about situational interpreting of rules. I'm pretty sure I've voiced being against that sort of thing literally since Yahweh. What, did you expect me to pull a 180 just because I stopped complaining about it for a while? That was just me doing much the same thing I'm going to do now--stop beating a dead horse, & observe how things progress.
Jesus fucking Christ, I should've checked this thread when I had a chance to log in earlier today.
I wouldn't have blamed you if you just avoided it altogether, really.
-
It really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that I'm still very dubious about situational interpreting of rules. I'm pretty sure I've voiced being against that sort of thing literally since Yahweh. What, did you expect me to pull a 180 just because I stopped complaining about it for a while? That was just me doing much the same thing I'm going to do now--stop beating a dead horse, & observe how things progress.
really, this is my main problem with democracy "too many heads creates too many viewpoints". regarding the rules as a historian, if ONE person makes the rules, it takes off the edge of different interpretations. there's one interpretation, and that's the boss'. i'm not saying it's better, just different. but since the boss (sigma, in this case) ruled it one way, i'm not gonna go against it, unless it's a very clear abuse of power. in this case, the rule is thought-out, explained, so i have no problem with it.
this is probably making me sound like a sycophant, but i don't care all that much... sigma called it, i'm ok with it. (even if i didn't find it to be troublesome in the first place)