Posted by Dinah on April 4, 2006, at 23:04:19
In reply to Re: For the record » Dinah, posted by LegWarmers on April 4, 2006, at 22:50:48
> > If I understand correctly the issue here is that there is a belief that uncivil posts on the thread were missed?
>
> yes. First, the poster posted on two boards, so to me, thats 2 punishments, right? the poster claimed matt had no validity to his posts and that he was high drama and that he shoudlnt be posting and so on and so on... Is that appropriate? and appropritate times 2?No. If both posts were posted before a PBC, then it is one infraction and gets one PBC.
>
> >
> > Or is it that you'd like him to comment specifically on the issue of people claiming to know someone personally and giving off board information about them. And whether that is considered uncivil under board policy? In other words, a clarification on board policy?
>
> Its both. I think that is a very real and scary issue and this person implied to know that Matt was on a suicide watch... whatever that means. And then said, in time I will reveal who i am. That is teasing. there is play teasing and then there is provocative teasing and this person was teasing in a way that was scary. i know who you are and i know what you are doing, kind of scary. That issue NEEDS to be addressed and or clarified.I think you'd probably be better off using hypotheticals here, since you need to be careful not to negatively characterize the behavior of any poster.
Posting information that you know to be incorrect is uncivil. Posting mysteriously is not uncivil. I'm not sure about being mistaken. I mean, it's concievable that a poster could confuse a poster for someone they know for one reason or another. It is uncivil posting personal information about someone, but I'm not sure where the line is drawn on that. It would be worth having Dr. Bob clarify.
>
> >
> > So that if someone knew me off board, or claimed to know me off board, and said things that I'd prefer not to disclose on board, would that be uncivil? Is that the issue?
>
> Yes and no, that is an issue yes. BUT this person claimed things that were not true, they claimed information that they had no true knowledge of at least thats what it appears. unless, yes, this person does somehow know Matt. But from what I gather, Matt does not know this person and this person implied to know Matt and have personal information regarding him. There appear to be several civilty issues here.
> Do you agree?
>Again, I would say it depends. A poster might be posting information they know to be untrue, which falls into the civility guidelines per Dr. Bob. They might be posting in error, believing what they say to be true. Or they may be posting truthfully something that another poster might prefer to not be made public. I think it's the last scenario that needs to be clarified by Dr. Bob.
poster:Dinah
thread:628542
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060317/msgs/629012.html