TSR Sharing your infomation!

[Devilfish]

Imma give up now, kay? *goes to find icepack to put on head after massive facepalm*

[macaque]

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.

1. Does he really? Did he know that the information that he got from the FA's might be from their PayPal account(s)?
2. Isn't that good, that he admits to it?
3. You have. I have a different view on it.
4. You think you don't steal. You call it sharing or something like that. TSR sells subscriptions and see nothing wrong with that, you call them criminals. Different point of view?

Flip-flopping, where?

[macaque]

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.

Then look again. That was information taken from Whois. That was the point. Some people (including you) didn't get it.

[neriana]

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.

S/he's reminding me of Scientologists, who are told to run away and cover their ears if anyone mentions Xenu.

Oh my god, macaque. Look: con artists say they aren't really stealing all the time. I say that taking a little old lady's money and promising to invest it, then running off with it to Bermuda, is stealing. This is not merely a "different point of view". One side must be wrong and the other side must be right. We think we're right. Until you actually read the evidence, your own "point of view" is utterly worthless.

[macaque]

[... keeps going on about terms of use etc ...]

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

im also seeing that the domain for TSR is owned by a Johan Isacsson, which is interesting, as ive been told by someone else that its meant to be owned by a steve something?

Did you also check the TOU of Verisign's whois database (thesimsresource.com)?

Why are we even discussing this?

[calalily]

Did you also check the TOU of Verisign's whois database (thesimsresource.com)?

Why are we even discussing this?

Yes - that's what I did yesterday. They don't allow dissemination for any purpose.  That's what I quoted to you yesterday.  Godaddy is different - so take this:  as me poking my tongue out at you.

As to why we are discussing this, you keep saying that if BlackGarden and ulkrhsn are breaking the agreement, then so is drborken - but you are wrong, wrong, wrong. I know I'm right, and like nohead before you, you think you're being cunning by bringing up a subject, going doggedly at it until proven completely wrong and then going "what are we talking about this for - that's not the point - you're just wrong because I say you are". I await your "I don't have to find case law just to prove a point to you mate! I have a life." with glee.

[macaque]

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?

I don't call people here idiots or worse even if they deserve it.
You don't really understand or you don't want to understand what i mean.
I _know_ she blurred the data.
With this extra little information go back and read again, i will not repeat myself anymore.

[Devilfish]

Okay, can we ignore the little shit now? Because I think anyone reading this thread will get our point now. Hell, a slice of toast would've gotten the point by now. We've tried everything. Can we please just return to our regulary scheduled programming and pretend we live in a world wher there are no Scientology-bred TSR monkeys? Please? For my sanity?

[macaque]

Yes - that's what I did yesterday. They don't allow dissemination for any purpose.  That's what I quoted to you yesterday.  Godaddy is different - so take this:  as me poking my tongue out at you.

Great, now where did drborken get the contact name for thesimsresource.com from? Let me save you some time, yes it was Verisign.

[Devilfish]

Nope, not taking the bait. I can haz ignore noa? Kittehs perhaps? Here, I'll start.

[calalily]

Yes - that's what I did yesterday. They don't allow dissemination for any purpose.  That's what I quoted to you yesterday.  Godaddy is different - so take this:  as me poking my tongue out at you.

Great, now where did drborken get the contact name for thesimsresource.com from? Let me save you some time, yes it was Verisign.

Except he didn't copy and paste the information such as he did for Insimenator, but rather related it - you can tell clearly by the font.  There's no rule about never talking about it, nor could there ever be.

[Paleoanth]

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?

FA's are representatives of TSR.  They are not TSR.  As reps, they shouldn't be sharing information.  Since they are not running TSR, they shouldn't have access to that information anyway.  So, the fact that they had access is bad, sharing it is even worse.

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.

Holy crap on toast.  She did not go public with senstive information. Yes she could have, because she got it from you people.  She has not done it and if she ever does, then yes it is on her. But you are missing the point here. She would not have had the information to post in the first place, if you guys weren't so much more interested in saving your pretty pixels than in legalities.

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.

That is good. I am glad you think that way.

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.

How do we know someone did?  Do you have proof that someone did say 'hey, guys? I think this might be illegal or at least unethical.  maybe we shouldn't do this.' You cannot just come over here and state that something may have happened without any proof. Screenshots or it didn't happen.

[Paden]

Good, then shut up and go the fuck away.

[macaque]

Except he didn't copy and paste the information such as he did for Insimenator, but rather related it - you can tell clearly by the font.  There's no rule about never talking about it, nor could there ever be.

Well i don't know what else to say so here you go: 
I think i'm done here.

[deelink]

I don't know what Macaque is trying to say.
She is trying to say that we are hypocrites for doing the same thing as TSR? Is that what the TSRbot is saying?

I am shocked and appalled by the lack of substantial evidence on this. Whois at TSR is not a guarded secret my dear. And we have never posted addresses or phone numbers, nor have we been malicious enough to attack them in RL. How many times are we going to be knocking your head over those facts?

As Palemato said: Coconut got the information verbatim from FA members who broke the rules, proving that the internet is not private and their messed up little schemes are now exposed. You calling her a hypocrite for exposing the harassment that your friends STARTED is just grasping at straws.



And that's the end of my contribution to this blackhole of an argument.
Let's just have rum guys. This is a complete waste of time.