TSR Sharing your infomation!

[Devilfish]

Why silly? Let's take a couple of steps back and get some perspective.
Can you imagine any place other than here where someone would call it a crime to copypaste the result of a whois lookup and be serious about it?
Here's the link:
http://phorum.mustnotbenamed.com/index.php/topic,2228.msg125423.html#msg125423

Here we have some more copypasted whois data by the way, right here on your own backyard
http://phorum.mustnotbenamed.com/index.php/topic,2228.msg125426.html#msg125426

Smart things have been said about this. In fact, I don't have anything to add except maybe one thing. That same thread? Go back to the very first page. See that post from Paden, with the letter? That used to have his full name, address and phone number attached. Now look at the replies to it, one of the first. Oh no, wait, you like to be spoonfed:

Although, you may want to snip out his address in your post Paden.

Good job defeating your own argument. Apparently us damn dirty pirates won't even post personal information if the person whom it belongs to does it himself.

Repeating what more eloquent people have said here, but can we please drop your "it was private" argument you keep insisting on? It has already been pointed out that it wasn't private and they had excellent reason to believe it wasn't. It's not like they're not aware of coconut and what he/she does. It's not like this came out of nowhere, hence our suspicion that this was leaked on purpose and that you are trying to rile us up and drag us to the dark side.

But for argument's sake, let's assume they thought his was actually private, that nobody would ever get to see this. Does that make it less of a crime? In my country, planning a crime is just as illegal as commiting one (and harassment is a crime) and I can't imagine that's very different elsewhere. If police officers were to stumble upon a group of criminals planning to hold up a bank, do you think they'd back away and leave them to it just because they were discussing it in private and hadn't actually done it yet?

Doing bad things behind everyone's back doesn't make them harmless. If fact, you could argue that if someone chooses to do or say something in a place where they assume nobody will ever hear or see, they know they're doing something wrong. The fact that they thought it was private makes it worse, not better.

[calalily]

But for argument's sake, let's assume they thought his was actually private, that nobody would ever get to see this. Does that make it less of a crime? In my country, planning a crime is just as illegal as commiting one (and harassment is a crime) and I can't imagine that's very different elsewhere. 

It's even more criminal here - s. 7b - those who assist or abet (even those who do nothing to stop it which means all those FAs in the thread and Thomass); s. 7c those who help (BlackGarden); s.7d. conspiracy (FA forums). That's of course with s. 7a - those who do (ulkrhsn).

[Devilfish]

Thanks for clearing that up cala.

There we go then. No more "But it was in private!". That was Thomas' defence as well and as has been pointed out, it's bullshit. Bringing the info to you once again, because you can't be arsed to seek it out yourself:



1. Thomas lies about what is shared.
2. He admits that real names were shared in a post where he hopes to prove his snow white innocence.
3. He uses the "private" defense, which I hope we have established is bull.
4. He accuses people of theft, which is also untrue.

The reason I'm throwing this screenshot out here (because it hasn't got to do with what happened in that new thread) is because I want you to see that you are defending untrustworthy people. That Thomas lies and pulls the wool over your eyes. Frankly, that you've been indoctrinated and lied to by someone who has no problems creating his own version of reality. You wanted to educate us? Then man up and be prepared to be educated yourself. You've been doing some flip-flopping. That's good. Now go all the way and admit you are wrong in defending these people.

[minionsRmine]

1. Thomas lies about what is shared.
2. He admits that real names were shared in a post where he hopes to prove his snow white innocence.
3. He uses the "private" defense, which I hope we have established is bull.
4. He accuses people of theft, which is also untrue.

5. He also can't spell!! LOSE, not "loose"!! Argh.

[Paden]

Someone needs to explain to the man that LOSE means when you do not win a game. LOOSE refers to his ethics and morals. Big difference, you know?

[minionsRmine]

LOOSE refers to his ethics and morals. Big difference, you know?

ROFL Total win!

Maybe someone will clue him and Steve on some commonly misspelled words. Or wait..... maybe Atwa will see this thread and give them the heads-up.

[Devilfish]

Meh, he's Swedish, and being a non-native speaker myself I get how it ca be difficult. But when addressing angry ex-customers, the least you can do is whip out a dictionary. But seriously, the man is a lying, unfeeling cult leader with an ego that would usher in the Second Flood if it were water, there's better things to pick on than his grammar skills.

Someone needs to explain to the man that LOSE means when you do not win a game. LOOSE refers to his ethics and morals. Big difference, you know?

^ This, however, is made of WIN 

[Zazazu]

LOOSE refers to his ethics and morals.

...or his bowels.

[macaque]

To everyone that didn't get it:
The links i posted were to show that whois information were being "illegally" (that's the word right calalily?) used here to.
Did you think much of it?
No? Exactly, it's a silly argument.

[Devilfish]

The links i posted were to show that whois information were being "illegally" (that's the word right calalily?) used here to.

What the... No. Just no. We all looked at those links and didn't see anything like it. People said as much. And nice job ignoring any and all posts that may have been a challenge to explain away. Ignoring everyone and stomping your foot because nobody listens to you is a tactic usually reserved for 3 year olds. For fuck's sake, can't you tell what a miserable little shit you're being? Don't complain we're ignoring your points while you skirt around any and all issues that arise with them.

Here's a hint: if about two dozen people agree on something and in the end you're left with a soapbox and a nasty temper, it may be time to concider you're just plain wrong.

[calalily]

To everyone that didn't get it:
The links i posted were to show that whois information were being "illegally" (that's the word right calalily?) used here to.
Did you think much of it?
No? Exactly, it's a silly argument.

drborken did not in fact break any terms.  As godaddy has different terms:

The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.'s WHOIS database, while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is" with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy. This information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you in obtaining information about domain name registration records.

That information was used for no other purpose but to get information about domain name registrations.

It goes onto say:

In particular, you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible, dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and solicitations of any kind, including spam. You further agree not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose, including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes

So - you're allowed to find out what it is, and know that information, but you're not allowed to find out for other reasons, and within those terms you're allowed to disseminate it for information reasons. drborken found out only for information purposes.  The terms are entirely different for jassims server company, which allows no dissemination whatsoever.

Moreover, drborken didn't actually print a private person's name, phone number or anything else, nor did they threaten to ring them.

[macaque]

TSR holds creations hostage. I don't want my stuff associated with that place any more.  DIRECTLY due to the personal information sharing.  Thomas told me to forget it.

That got me to thinking, so I went over to TSR and did some poking.  When you sign up for an account, they ask for some pretty personal information.   Stuff that no one would put without some assurance.  They give you an assurance too:

requested information. Please note, however, that none of the information will be transfered to other parties than TSR. The purpose of TSR having the address information is to be able to send prizes from our many upcoming competitions.

(Bolding was added by me)

TSR can't even follow their own rules.  No, I don't consider their FA's to be "TSR."  They could be considered employees of TSR, but that's different.  And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see it saying, "To be able to send prizes and post in our FA forum, if we suspect you of being a pirate." 

So are FA's only considered TSR if they post PayPal information?

Were you born this stupid, or did you have to take special lessons?  Or, have you never checked out Coconut's journal?  Coconut blanked out the parts with the information.  If coconut hadn't done that, we'd be yelling at her.  She blurred it.   She did NOT share personal information. What she has done was shown us proof that TSR was sharing personal information. 

So how are you going to have it, does coconut go public with sensitive information or not?
No but she could?
Well if she does then that's on her, IMHO.

That statement is so full of fail I hardly know where to begin. First of all, there are quite a few FA's, and as former FA's have told us, they aren't all close personal friends.  And, even if they are, what's wrong is wrong.  If I share personal information about someone with my friends, that doesn't make it right.

Stop making me have to repeat myself, people here don't like that.
I'm not saying it was right to post those names, OK? I have never said that.

And wrong is wrong.  I don't care who you're with.  If I say, "God, that person pissed me off,  stealing my meshes, I'd like to smack her upside the head" with my friends, that's one thing.  If they are close friends, they will know that the threat is empty.  On the other hand, if I say, "That person stole my meshes and here is her address and phone number, we're not going to let her get away with it," that's quite another.    And you know what?  I know my friends well enough and trust them enough that were I to do such a thing, they would say, "Okay Darqstar, you crossed the line.  I understand you being upset, but what you're asking is just wrong." 

How do you know someone didn't say that? How do you know coconut would show it if someone did?
And i think you're blowing it up just a little bit.

[Devilfish]

Were you born this stupid, or did you have to take special lessons?  Or, have you never checked out Coconut's journal?  Coconut blanked out the parts with the information.  If coconut hadn't done that, we'd be yelling at her.  She blurred it.   She did NOT share personal information. What she has done was shown us proof that TSR was sharing personal information. 

So how are you going to have it, does coconut go public with sensitive information or not?
No but she could?
Well if she does then that's on her, IMHO.

This proves to me, without a shadow of a doubt, that you've never even glanced at the TSR posts coconut made. You would've known. My bet is you heard about all of this on the TSR forums, or a forum that supports that cultish way of thinking, and came here to tell us nasty thieves what's what.

That or you're a complete idiot.

So how are you going to have it? Misguided sheep or asshole troll?

[macaque]

Smart things have been said about this. In fact, I don't have anything to add except maybe one thing. That same thread? Go back to the very first page. See that post from Paden, with the letter? That used to have his full name, address and phone number attached. Now look at the replies to it, one of the first. Oh no, wait, you like to be spoonfed:

Although, you may want to snip out his address in your post Paden.

Good job defeating your own argument. Apparently us damn dirty pirates won't even post personal information if the person whom it belongs to does it himself.

I explained why i posted this link in a previous post. I wouldn't have cared if the address were still there even on a public forum like this. The Whois information IS public information.

Repeating what more eloquent people have said here, but can we please drop your "it was private" argument you keep insisting on? It has already been pointed out that it wasn't private and they had excellent reason to believe it wasn't. It's not like they're not aware of coconut and what he/she does. It's not like this came out of nowhere, hence our suspicion that this was leaked on purpose and that you are trying to rile us up and drag us to the dark side.

But for argument's sake, let's assume they thought his was actually private, that nobody would ever get to see this. Does that make it less of a crime? In my country, planning a crime is just as illegal as commiting one (and harassment is a crime) and I can't imagine that's very different elsewhere. If police officers were to stumble upon a group of criminals planning to hold up a bank, do you think they'd back away and leave them to it just because they were discussing it in private and hadn't actually done it yet?

Doing bad things behind everyone's back doesn't make them harmless. If fact, you could argue that if someone chooses to do or say something in a place where they assume nobody will ever hear or see, they know they're doing something wrong. The fact that they thought it was private makes it worse, not better.

I think i have explained enough times my view on what a private forum is, with or without coconuts.

[Tabby]

 Oh my God, you are making my brain melt! Do you not fucking understand, that you can come in here and repeat a thousand times over about "private forums" and "gossip" and we are not going to give in and say, " Hey, this little fucktard might be right!"?!?!?  GO AWAY! 


   It doesnt matter how they got the information, SHARING IT WAS WRONG!