Skip to main content

General O/T Chit Chat Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Witty Banter said:
You avoided answering that, so do you believe Mutley publishing stored hacked account data falls inside or outide acceptable behaviour in here, and the rule in the terms of service forbidding posting personal details?
Click to expand...
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
 
Witty Banter said:
Exactly, leaving him in limbo as the only member in here having deliberately flouted the basic rules protecting privacy.
Click to expand...
Given the fact he didn't ban the member who sent me the abusive PM (that pertains to the response you spent all that time today ferreting out), who also outed Tim our Leaders full name in her "snitches get stitches" rant, I am guessing he will probably be okay with it.

Maybe try PM'ing Tim directly so you can ascertain exactly how many fucks he gives. My guess, just quietly, will be none.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:
 
Trala said:
Given the fact he didn't ban the member who sent me the abusive PM (that pertains to the response you spent all that time today ferreting out), who also outed Tim our Leaders full name in her "snitches get stitches" rant, I am guessing he will probably be okay with it.

Maybe try PM'ing Tim directly so you can ascertain exactly how many fucks he gives. My guess, just quietly, will be none.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Click to expand...
At trala's urging, @Tim, @marquisite, @Brekkie, can you please publicly rule on whether MutleyP's October 25th vengeful and extortionate publishing and dripfeeding of my personal account details that he stored from the December forum hack and outage is acceptable forum conduct and behaviour, and within the terms of service outlawing posting private personal details of members, in this case, in vendetta. I firmly believe that privacy is the member's choice and not MutleyP's malicious choice to use hacked account data in threatful spite. If MutleyP's conduct of storing hack data and posting private personal details to extort is acceptable conduct, can you please update the Terms of Service, as currently his actions were in no way acceptable from a member and strictly outlawed.
 
Last edited:
Witty Banter said:
At trala's urging, @Tim, @marquisite, @Brekkie, can you please publicly rule on whether MutleyP's vengeful and extortionate publishing and dripfeeding of my personal account details that he stored from the December forum hack and outage is acceptable forum conduct and behaviour, and within the terms of service outlawing posting personal details of members, in this case, in vendetta. I firmly believe that privacy is the member's choice and not MutleyP's malicious choice to use hacked account data in threatful spite. If MutleyP's conduct of storing hack data and posting private personal details to extort is acceptable conduct, can you please update the Terms of Service, as currently his actions were in no way acceptable from a member and strictly outlawed.
Click to expand...
And we wait...

Let's make it interesting shall we? Put a little wager on it.

If Admin give a fuck - Mutley gets banned; if they don't, you shut the fuck up.

There has to be some sort of prize at the end of all this.
 
Trala said:
If Admin give a fuck - Mutley gets banned; if they don't, you shut the fuck up.
Click to expand...
I can give you this assurance that the formal descent into the Wild West will push me voluntarily into the audience, ducking. I question the intelligence of anyone who currently respects their own privacy continuing to operate under the direct threat of being revealed by MutleyP and his hate list. You accuse people of being meeps, but equally protect intimidation attempts preventing independent voice.
 
Last edited:
Witty Banter said:
There is no question that Mutley attempted to extort me. Really, what other motive are you even constructing to him dangling and progressively releasing personal hacked details, piece by piece punctuated by 'work it out' as though from a corny movie, while fonting that he has more information about me and others. The clear threat is that he wants behaviour compliance under the threat of him releasing real life personal data he has stored not by accident.

To be completely honest, you liking one comment of his that contained my personal information shows your alignment.
Click to expand...

Just as a pre-warning, I don't want to go into a repetitive long winded discussion on this over and over again, so hopefully this is not where this leads. I cannot comment on Mutley's motives as I am not him, however the "motive" you speak of is kind of what I'm trying to gauge. You keep saying extortion, but my question to is extortion for what purpose? Ie, what do you believe he was trying to obtain from you by posting your personal details.

I can accept that you felt your privacy was violated, and maybe I'd feel the same if it was me, it's the extortion part that is confusing me.

As for me liking that post, it probably had nothing to do with the personal information therein but maybe the overall content of it, I really don't recall. I wouldn't read too much into what I or any other members like as far as alignment, it might just mean that at that particular juncture they agreed with something in the post. This was mid-conflict if I recall but as if it's humanly possible to keep up with things, anyway, I probably was better able to see Mutley's side of the discussion at that time.

Anyway, I see the mods have been called so really all we can do is wait for their opinion. Well that and have the same conversation over and over and over again.
 
jessy_girl said:
Just as a pre-warning, I don't want to go into a repetitive long winded discussion on this over and over again, so hopefully this is not where this leads. I cannot comment on Mutley's motives as I am not him, however the "motive" you speak of is kind of what I'm trying to gauge. You keep saying extortion, but my question to is extortion for what purpose? Ie, what do you believe he was trying to obtain from you by posting your personal details.

I can accept that you felt your privacy was violated, and maybe I'd feel the same if it was me, it's the extortion part that is confusing me.

As for me liking that post, it probably had nothing to do with the personal information therein but maybe the overall content of it, I really don't recall. I wouldn't read too much into what I or any other members like as far as alignment, it might just mean that at that particular juncture they agreed with something in the post. This was mid-conflict if I recall but as if it's humanly possible to keep up with things, anyway, I probably was better able to see Mutley's side of the discussion at that time.

Anyway, I see the mods have been called so really all we can do is wait for their opinion. Well that and have the same conversation over and over and over again.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but given that there have been long threads dedicated to Witty v The Clique and a history, the thought that coercion of favourable behaviour compliance doesn't enter your mind? Me leaving the site as many others do under the threat doesn't cross your mind?
 
Witty Banter said:
Sorry, but given that there have been long threads dedicated to Witty v The Clique and a history, the thought that coercion of favourable behaviour compliance doesn't enter your mind?
Click to expand...

Honestly it did not. But now I understand more where your head is at which I guess is largely what I have been trying to determine.
 
Witty Banter said:
Sorry, but given that there have been long threads dedicated to Witty v The Clique and a history, the thought that coercion of favourable behaviour compliance doesn't enter your mind? Me leaving the site as many others do under the threat doesn't cross your mind?
Click to expand...

A history that involves me.
 
Jam said:
Good grief. Is it any wonder that most of the ol' timey posters don't come here any more?

Btw, I'm glad that I'm not related to Mutley because every time he posts something reprehensible it seems that someone close to him dies. Poor darlin'.
Click to expand...

What the actual fuck?
 
Welcome to the O/T Thread
Don't mind the mess.

giphy.gif
 
Ok... As I see it:

Motley behaved badly and probably against the rules.
Witty called him on it plus has repeated it a number of times, (which has possibly drawn more attention than the original incident).
People have differing views but Motley has thus far not been banned, although this may yet happen, we don't know.

What now? Aside from Motley being banned, what do you actually want to happen, Witty?
 
Mooseface said:
Ok... As I see it:

Motley behaved badly and probably against the rules.
Witty called him on it plus has repeated it a number of times, (which has possibly drawn more attention than the original incident).
People have differing views but Motley has thus far not been banned, although this may yet happen, we don't know.

What now? Aside from Motley being banned, what do you actually want to happen, Witty?
Click to expand...
For me this has become a case of basic common sense. I honestly would have to see for myself that administrators are apathetic to his conduct to believe it. You simply don't post as an individual or host as an organisation, stolen hacked material given only under consent of privacy. Setting the example that this is in any way acceptable gives free rein to any damaging and escalating behaviour.
 
Last edited:
Witty Banter said:
For me this has become a case of basic common sense. I honestly would have to see for myself that administrators are apathetic to his conduct to believe it. You simply don't post as an individual or host as an organisation, stolen hacked material given only under consent of privacy. Setting the example that this is in any way acceptable gives free rein to any damaging and escalating behaviour.
Click to expand...
Yes I understand your position. It is the site's decision though. Can we leave the topic with them? If they act then well and good. If they don't then .... also well and good? (Clearly not exactly 'well and good' from your perspective, but their decision/non-decision has to be accepted by the users of the site. We don't have to continue to use the site obviously)[DOUBLEPOST=1446379014][/DOUBLEPOST]
delcan said:
This thread

i_gots_poo_brain_d8_by_sugarfoxxy-d4c1uzf.gif
Click to expand...
What does this mean??!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tee
Mooseface said:
Yes I understand your position. It is the site's decision though. Can we leave the topic with them? If they act then well and good. If they don't then .... also well and good? (Clearly not exactly 'well and good' from your perspective, but their decision/non-decision has to be accepted by the users of the site. We don't have to continue to use the site obviously)
Click to expand...
I think users may likely be asked to disclaim any former presumption of privacy if deliberate perpetrators are encouraged by being given soft treatment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top