TSR Sharing your infomation!

[Moonie]

That's great!  Maybe it should be this sites official anthem.   

[Missbonbon]

It would be like on here, if I posted a picture of my vag, I wouldn't be shocked if other forums were talking about it, or if the members said "Ewww comes look at this!" to their significant other.

Miss Bonbon, i just can't get that image outta my head now. If i dream about your Vag tonight it's all your fault! LOL

  Glad I could make your night. lol.

[Paden]

littletoes, I've heard a recording of that one and love it!!

[calalily]

I have no problem with pictures of his house, which could be anywhere, posted on a blog.  Particularly since he got it from lying and cheating.  And I daresay Thomass has no problems with it either - he didn't try to get the blog taken down when the pictures went up. He didn't give a toss - he only protested when his secret tools plans were revealed.  So if he doesn't have any problem, I fail to see why we should be kermitflailing about the invasion of his privacy. That argument could extend to the whole of the blog.

[Devilfish]

You know what I did think was too personal? When that video of Atwa's sister (Ulla was it?) was posted with a "look how crazy runs in the family" kind of comment. That was tasteless in my opinion. Not exactly an invasion of privacy (it was a youtube video she had posted herself after all), but a step too far, because it involved someone who clearly wasn't involved and wouldn't choose to be involved if they had a choice. Ulla may well be the craziest mother to ever walk God's green earth, but that's no skin of my nose. If it's got anything to do with me or this community directly, it's fair game. Thomas pays a narcoleptic midget for sexual favours? Not my problem. Thomas uses TSR money for it? Gloves are off.

Solader, I'm curious. Are you just talking about the pictures of that house? Or are there other things as well?

[Solander]

Solader, I'm curious. Are you just talking about the pictures of that house? Or are there other things as well?

Well, I did mainly focus on the pictures, as I consider them to be "private area". And i just don't like the idea of the internet making good old privacy becoming more and more relative. The fact, that you post something at a forum does not mean you agree to have it republished somewhere else. This does not apply to public postings, but to private forums like the FA forum at TSR. I consider it to be a "private" area as any other protected area of the internet, which is only available to a selected group of individuals.

The general chat about hunting down people that share TSR stuff at the booty is ontopic concerning the current conflict betwenn TSR and you guys and one could maybe say, that a mole could have the right to inform the other party about what's going on. Your personal espionage mission in the enemys teritory.

But in the second the information isn't ontopic anymore, it is a no-no concerning publication at another place. In my opinion, this includes personal problems of a person in private life (maybe some FA needed the help of an psychiatrist because of an "exlusive" thread here), anything he or she does when not sitting in front of the PC or what he/she buys, sells or creates when not being acting in behalf or working for a specific site.

Example: Assume, i am in a conflict with a bank manager who sold me some lehman brothers certificates and bought a nice car with this money. I now would claim the right for me to inform whatever person about the really bad advise of the bank and the bank manager, could publish the letters of my laywer etc. etc. But i would never publish pictures of the car like "look what he bought with my money", as this is not related to the deal "i bought worthless stuff from someone and try to take him to court".

Maybe this point of view is too strict or whatever, but it's simply mine. And it does not only apply to Thomas or TSR. I would also dislike any publication by TSR saying that "<insert any pirate name> is fighting against us, because he <insert any personal catastrophe> and needs some outlet for his frustration." or "<insert any pirate name> is a hypocrith, as he did do <insert any not so legal action like downloading music on a fileshare site etc.>"

Hope you get what i would like to say. It's damn difficult to translate complex german thoughts into english text without loosing half of the original meaning So if there should be anything not so clear for you or if you are not sure, if you understand a specific point in the way i expected you would do, please ask me

[SnarkyShark]

Hmmm, not really digging the fact that the last few pages of this thread have revolved around whether or not coconut should have posted pictures of a house that Thomass posted himself. Especially, since the real issue was coconut's revelation that Thomass was intending to use another person's illness for his own benefit. But, hey, I guess it's a matter of perspective.

[Paleoanth]

The general chat about hunting down people that share TSR stuff at the booty is ontopic concerning the current conflict betwenn TSR and you guys and one could maybe say, that a mole could have the right to inform the other party about what's going on. Your personal espionage mission in the enemys teritory.

A mole would be someone we sent over there to infiltrate.  That is not what happened.  Someone(s) over there got completely disgusted by the activities of Thomas et al. and decided to blow the whistle.  Whistle blowers do happen in business and are generally regarded as heros or at least people with integrity or have had had enough. Coconut does not work for us, is not our mole and does this because (I am assuming) he or she or they were disgusted by what they saw.  They came here because they knew they would find a sympathetic audience and would be able to get the word out.  Plus, what they posted started an avalanche of other postings.  Mine included.  I also don't work for PMBD.   

But in the second the information isn't ontopic anymore, it is a no-no concerning publication at another place. In my opinion, this includes personal problems of a person in private life (maybe some FA needed the help of an psychiatrist because of an "exlusive" thread here), anything he or she does when not sitting in front of the PC or what he/she buys, sells or creates when not being acting in behalf or working for a specific site.

Some FA needed help way before any thread here was started.  What some FA does when not acting in behalf of a specific site could be debated.  We don't know what all the things some FA did under direction or on their own.  Some of the things were probably done under the direction of some person at a certain site who employs some FA, some things were probably done just because some FA is in need of help.  I don't recall that there was anything posted about what some FA does in the meantime.  If so, then I would have to look at it.  Some FA makes lots of things known on the internet though, and in public. 

Example: Assume, i am in a conflict with a bank manager who sold me some lehman brothers certificates and bought a nice car with this money. I now would claim the right for me to inform whatever person about the really bad advise of the bank and the bank manager, could publish the letters of my laywer etc. etc. But i would never publish pictures of the car like "look what he bought with my money", as this is not related to the deal "i bought worthless stuff from someone and try to take him to court".

If they sold you knowingly worthless stock and used the money to buy himself nice things, then yeah, you should expose him.  Especially if THEY posted pics of that car and said, "Look what I just bought! Yuk, yuk yuk!"  This is not a matter of bad advice and we are going out of bounds.  This is someone doing something illegal, against the EULA and then parading his new second house around to his employees.  See the difference? You are comparing apples and oranges. In other words, two different things that are not comparable. 

Hope you get what i would like to say. It's damn difficult to translate complex german thoughts into english text without loosing half of the original meaning So if there should be anything not so clear for you or if you are not sure, if you understand a specific point in the way i expected you would do, please ask me

I cannot even imagine going onto a foreign language board and trying to make myself understood, much less debate a topic. 

[Devilfish]

Hope you get what i would like to say. It's damn difficult to translate complex german thoughts into english text without loosing half of the original meaning So if there should be anything not so clear for you or if you are not sure, if you understand a specific point in the way i expected you would do, please ask me

God, I know what that's like. Don't worry, I understand fine.

I get what you're saying, and I do understand that some people would think this is taking it one step too far. If I remember correcty, you asked us if we ever had doubts about going too far with this, and the answer is clearly no. Since nothing illegal happened from our side, it's a matter of opinion. Your moral system is different from mine, and cala's, and paden's and so on, and we could argue until we're blue in the face without ever being right or wrong about anything. So I do respect your opinion, or at least your right to state it here and be heard.

What I do want to say though is that Thomas has shown remarkebly poor judgement all accross the board. He seriously needs to decide whether he wants the TSR peeps to be friends, slaves or employees, becase you can't have your cake and eat it too.
My father runs a rather lage company. He does not personally know all the people that work for him. He pays them for their work and talks to them often, but he doesn't know who they are outside the factory. So he knows better than to waltz unto the workfloor showing pictures of his newly adopted cousin or the house he's building in France. That's just common sense and has noting to do with the internet stealigng our privacy and so on.

It's the same with Thomas and the FAs. Either they're his friends and he needs to stop paying them for their work and cracking the whip, or they're his employees and he needs to keep a professional distance. A decent boss can't be both a manager and your best buddy, especially not in a very large company. The reverse is also true. Don't try to be friends with the guy who writes your paycheck. As soon as the exchange of money is involved, it's hard to talk friendship.
He choose to brag to a bunch of employees. Apparently, one of these employees isn't as much of a friend as he thought. Thomas is a big boy and he doesn't need us or anyone else to watch out for him and hold his hand on the mean old intartubes. He made a very poor decision. If he's suffering because of it, that's entirely his fault.

I know that in your eyes, his incredibly poor managment skills aren't reason enough to have these pictures redistributed, but I'm still of the opinion that the people who were being lied to ('sub money pays for server costs') had a right to the truth. If a real reporter caught wind of something fishy going on in the management of, for example, a multinational company, I'd also expect that person to sound the alarm and gather the troops. If there's a reasonable chance you've discovered a truth that was purposefully being hidden by those who benefit from it (as is the case here), I would go so far as to say that it's your duty to get the word out.

But, again, we're talking opinions here.

[Solander]

Hmmm, not really digging the fact that the last few pages of this thread have revolved around whether or not coconut should have posted pictures of a house that Thomass posted himself. Especially, since the real issue was coconut's revelation that Thomass was intending to use another person's illness for his own benefit. But, hey, I guess it's a matter of perspective.

Well, the threads in this forum tend to become offtopic from time to time as far as i did notice And the topic of Thomas intending to use another person's illness is offtopic, too, if you restrict this thread on the original "TSR sharing your information" title.

But, again, we're talking opinions here.

Yep, we are. I am not proselytizing (evangelizing?!?!!? well, acting as a missionary  ) and pressing anyone to adopt my position. Just wanted to make clear that from my point of view, some things go too far. If anyone agrees, that's fine for me, if not, well, i can't force you, so that's ok, too.

[Paleoanth]

Yep, we are. I am not proselytizing (evangelizing?!?!!? well, acting as a missionary  ) and pressing anyone to adopt my position. Just wanted to make clear that from my point of view, some things go too far. If anyone agrees, that's fine for me, if not, well, i can't force you, so that's ok, too.

A specific example with a post reference would be helpful here. 

[Anouk]

Well Solander, how about you open a thread for every bad thing involved with TSR seperatly, and see how the first three pages of the forum have a title with 'TSR' in it? 
The title of this thread isn't going to change any time soon, it's too good in ur Googles. 

[Skoria_Bay]

What I do want to say though is that Thomas has shown remarkebly poor judgement all accross the board. He seriously needs to decide whether he wants the TSR peeps to be friends, slaves or employees, becase you can't have your cake and eat it too.
My father runs a rather lage company. He does not personally know all the people that work for him. He pays them for their work and talks to them often, but he doesn't know who they are outside the factory. So he knows better than to waltz unto the workfloor showing pictures of his newly adopted cousin or the house he's building in France. That's just common sense and has noting to do with the internet stealigng our privacy and so on.

It's the same with Thomas and the FAs. Either they're his friends and he needs to stop paying them for their work and cracking the whip, or they're his employees and he needs to keep a professional distance. A decent boss can't be both a manager and your best buddy, especially not in a very large company. The reverse is also true. Don't try to be friends with the guy who writes your paycheck. As soon as the exchange of money is involved, it's hard to talk friendship.
He choose to brag to a bunch of employees. Apparently, one of these employees isn't as much of a friend as he thought. Thomas is a big boy and he doesn't need us or anyone else to watch out for him and hold his hand on the mean old intartubes. He made a very poor decision. If he's suffering because of it, that's entirely his fault.

I know that in your eyes, his incredibly poor managment skills aren't reason enough to have these pictures redistributed, but I'm still of the opinion that the people who were being lied to ('sub money pays for server costs') had a right to the truth. If a real reporter caught wind of something fishy going on in the management of, for example, a multinational company, I'd also expect that person to sound the alarm and gather the troops. If there's a reasonable chance you've discovered a truth that was purposefully being hidden by those who benefit from it (as is the case here), I would go so far as to say that it's your duty to get the word out.

But, again, we're talking opinions here.

I worked for a large corporation here in the US. No, I didn't know the CEO personally nor did he know my name or me from any other of the thousands the company employed. Certainly he didn't waltz into our office and start flashing around pictures of the latest yacht he bought with the outrageous salary the company paid him. Thomas has the morals and ethics of a snake oil salesman. I know TSR is smaller than the company I worked for, but he needs to grow up and take responsibility for running the site as a business (right or wrong it is a business) and stop acting like a 7 year old because someone stole his toys and he decides to get back at them.

Solander you have made some very interesting points and I would never know that English was not your native tongue. I do think you have given us good reason to stop and pause for a moment to make sure we are on track with what we hope to do here. And I thank you for speaking your mind.

TSR should be destroyed because of all the underhanded practices they employed over the past few years. Any business which engaged in such practices (at least in the US) would have been shut down, the owners prosecuted, fined and possibly jailed. "The Insider" is a film about the American Tobacco industry. Coconut is like the "insider" in the film blowing the whistle on TSR.

[Darqstar]

I really don't want to say "Two wrongs don't make a right," but sorry, Solander, it's coming across like you're more in sympathy to TSR than to us. 

Pictures of a house that had already been posted, are just that.  Pictures of a house.  There was nothing really to identify it easily, you'd have to know the area to recognize it.  I never saw a street sign or even a number on the house that someone could track it down.  To me, it's no different than if I posted a picture of my car in my live journal, had it FL and then later I found the picture on the 'net.  While I'd be worried that one of my friends had betrayed me, the fact that the picture of the car got out wouldn't bother me.  Especially if all they did was pass around a picture. 

Now, if they had written all over the picture "DARQSTAR LIVES AT ________ HER PHONE NUMBER IS _________  CALL HER AND HARASS HER, SHE'S A FLAMING CUNT!" That would be different.  Because that would be giving away personal information, and encouraging people to use it in a way that is harmful to me.  But Coconut just posted the pictures, unaltered, pictures that he had already posted himself.  Yes, he posted them on a so-called private forum, but someone as supposedly computer savvy as Thomas knows damned well that there really is no such thing as a private forum. He showed them to people he doesn't know very well, they are at best, merely  internet friends.  He also did not say in the post, "Guys, I'm showing you these pictures because you're my pals.  Please don't show them to anyone else."  Had he said that, and Coconut posted them, I'd lose a lot of respect for Coconut, because that information has almost nothing to do with our mission. 

So far, to give Coconut credit, she's been very honest about this.  She could have screencapped the whole "Let's expose the dying man" thread and posted that, but she didn't, because that would be dishonest.   Even though she knows that there will be people who can now say, "Pictures or it never happened!" she still won't compromise on that very sensitive information.

It's been indicated in replies she's made on this forum, that she's close enough to the throne, that if she doesn't already have, she could probably get very personal information about Thomas, like his real phone number and real address and post them.  She hasn't. 

If I had to trust someone with personal information that I did not want the world to know about?  I'd give it to Coconut long before I gave it to Thomas.  She might tell people, "I have personal information on Darqstar!" but she wouldn't actually share the information with anyone.  Thomas would be likely to post it up on a so-called private forum of people, some of whom he barely knows and certainly can't trust.

[Devilfish]

Pictures of a house that had already been posted, are just that.  Pictures of a house.  There was nothing really to identify it easily, you'd have to know the area to recognize it.  I never saw a street sign or even a number on the house that someone could track it down.  To me, it's no different than if I posted a picture of my car in my live journal, had it FL and then later I found the picture on the 'net.  While I'd be worried that one of my friends had betrayed me, the fact that the picture of the car got out wouldn't bother me.  Especially if all they did was pass around a picture. 

  Also a good point. I mean, I'm a model, and there's less-than-clothed pictures of me all over the tubes. Some have my real name on them, even though the contracts (veritable bricks of paper) I sign always state that my real name can never be shown on the same page, webpage etc. as a picture. And these are legally binding contracts, not some 'Don't be a dick, okay?' oral agreement. Some photographers don't care or forget and put up my name. I get pissed off, have stern talks with them, report them, and sometimes they remove my name and sometimes they don't. Even so, these pictures labaled with my name have been around for quite a while on the tubes, anyone with decent Google-fu skill can find them and never, not once, have I gotten in any sort of trouble.

So yeah, I doubt a picture of a house somewhere in Sweden (that's all of Sweden) is going to bring out the stalkers and the nutters.