Posted by SLS on January 7, 2011, at 6:28:37
In reply to Truly disillusioned by this entire thread, posted by jane d on January 6, 2011, at 23:38:30
> This was a private dispute. That one party has tried to make a public one by claiming it's about general principles. It wasn't. I really thought that people would see thru that. I'm beyond disillusioned that so few did.
>
> Does anyone else have a cow that's mysteriously sickened? Jump right in.When one of two parties has made public the alleged behaviors of the other by posting them or referring to them on the Internet, it is no longer a private matter, regardless of how desirable it might have been for the two parties to communicate privately. Here, we have one party accusing another of behavior that is deleterious to one or more people. It is not a matter of principle. It is a matter of hurt or harm.
I would not be so quick to suggest that to blame one party vindicates the other. I think this thread deserves to continue, but should perhaps become more focused on the general and less on the acts of named individuals. I don't usually use this phrase, but "it is what it is." This thread has had legs for specific reasons. I would like to know what they are. I don't believe that this is about pack mentality and bullying. I think it is more about hurt and fear.
Does anyone have the right to collect and publish information about another individual using any material found publicly on the Internet? No. However, this isn't about libel or kiddie porn. There is some serious debate over the Internet and its use as being subject to law. Is anything appearing on the Internet automatically copyrighted? These are interesting and materially important issues.
On Psycho-Babble, issues of privacy and anonymity predominate over those of legalities. For one to feel safe disclosing that they are mentally ill often depends on anonymity. I don't know whether or not there is a legal precedent to proscribe collecting words without publishing them. Let us assume for the moment that doing so is legal. Let us also assume that publishing this information is legal. Would it be desirable to discourage such behaviors when they arise on Psycho-Babble? Are acts of peer pressure desirable? Perhaps a more gentle general reminder of sorts can be issued by moderators from time to time within threads. It might even be included in the FAQs that privacy and anonymity is encouraged. I don't think it is imprudent to emphasize to the posting community the importance of privacy and why.
I have a few questions that I feel are important to answer. I offered suggestions based upon my current judgments. I doubt they are written on stone tablets somewhere.
1. Is it legal to collect and publish words that compromise the privacy and anonymity of an individual aside from libel?
2. Is it desirable to discourage such behavior using the written word as a means aside from libel?
3. Is it desirable to discourage such behavior using peer pressure as a means?
4. Is it desirable that moderators sanction an individual with posting blocks for such behavior?
5. Are posting blocks on a private website legal without sufficient due process?
Libel and due process are genuine concerns when a poster or moderator accuses an individual of a behavior whether it be legal or illegal.
I think the bottom line is that it is desirable to suggest to the community that privacy and anonymity are important to maintain in order to maintain the health and safety of Psycho-Babble. Moderators should not suggest that, or accuse any individual of a particular act, even when the words submitted by the poster are clearly libelous. This isn't a court of law.
The above suppositions indicate that posting blocks are undesirable, if not illegal.
- Scott
Some see things as they are and ask why.
I dream of things that never were and ask why not.
poster:SLS
thread:975555
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20101201/msgs/976075.html