Originally posted by RagnorakMerchantParkPro really is disgusting then. I think the I'm Spartacus idea is a great laugh. But I can't understand people like him. They are so weird!!! (Weirder than the rest of us on a chess website, anyway.)
MPP posted info in his profile making it very easy to find out who he is. He sent his photos to Gatecrasher with his full name included. He continually bates people by accusing them of hiding behind an anonymous internet alias, unlike him.
Seeing as most of his posts have been removed from this site, here are samples from other chess websites..."Don't ...[text shortened]... mmy. That is a fact."
The same type posts were posted here in a removed thread.
D
Originally posted by AmauroteHa-ha. Hilarious. Absolutely funny.
Phlabbit: Translate that into American, please.
Amaurote: "I support Al Qaeda."
It was a throwaway joke about translating a mildly liberal bit of fluff into a right-wing American vocabulary. Perhaps we need more irony-meter vendors on ebay.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
I had someone on playchess look me up. Not surprising since I had my photo, first name, club and map location listed, even on my new account I still have photo, name and map location....If people put out that amount of information or simlar as in MMP's case is it surprising when the information gets put to use? I dont think people disagree with Fat Lady getting a forum ban but 3 years is overkill, seriously make it a few weeks - month. Lesson learned....for both sides, if you dont want your name put in public dont put personal information in your profile.
Originally posted by RagnorakYes, I know - but did Fat Lady post information that was available on this site? If FatLady only posted stuff in MMP's profile then there is no reason for a ban at all. I'm not defending MMP's activities for a second but I don't think you can construct a defence for Fat Lady based around provocation, or around what MMP was doing; he was trying to provoke Bedlam into revealing his own identity, but that is not the same as actually revealing someone else's. The fact that MMP makes abusive posts is more or less irrelevant to this matter; there are plenty of examples of his posts that haven't been removed that make me unsympathetic towards him, but his character is not a defence of FatLady's actions. I exchanged pm's with FatLady once and he is was a gentleman, which is a basis for clemency, not for saying he's not guilty because we like him and don't like the other guy.
MPP posted info in his profile making it very easy to find out who he is. He sent his photos to Gatecrasher with his full name included. He continually bates people by accusing them of hiding behind an anonymous internet alias, unlike him.
Seeing as most of his posts have been removed from this site, here are samples from other chess websites...
[to ...[text shortened]... examples for reasons of space]
The same type posts were posted here in a removed thread.
D
The point is that FatLady's only defence to posting this stuff can be that it was in MMP's profile. Doing some detective work and collating stuff from other sites isn't defendable as it breaches MMP's privacy. MMP's real name is not on Gatecrasher's site, but the relevant page was modified on the 24th of November. I don't know what was in Fat Lady's post, and I don't know if MMP has changed his profile since Fat Lady made the post. If it was in MMP's RHP profile when FatLady made the post then Fat Lady shouldn't be banned at all. If you tryed hard enough you could probably work out who MMP is from what's available, but that isn't the same as publishing his actual name. Having said that, if MMP's real name was on the rhpfaces site then I think the case for a long ban starts to dwindle, his name still shouldn't have been posted here, but if it was on a derivative website then he could reasonably expect people from this site to find out his name.
Originally posted by DeepThoughthe posted MPP's real name, which was not in his profile. so the guilt thing is there, and a punishment of some kind was justified. but the length of the punishment was completely out of hand. I think weeks or a month would've been more appropriate.
Yes, I know - but did Fat Lady post information that was available on this site?
totally regardless or that, MPP should've been banned a long time ago. allowing him to continue his obnoxious and slandering posting, even if most of it gets deleted immediately, can only be interpreted as an open season for similar behaviour. which is fine by me, just as long as the rules are same for everyone.
Some observations:
1. A zero-tolerance policy on privacy and anonymity at RHP is probably necessary, but apparently there was not such a policy in place when the FatLady Incident occurred.
2. FatLady's penalty is excessive and should be rescinded.
3. The sad irony of this situation is that the rancorous MerchantParkPro continues to vilify and malign, without reprimand, while FatLady suffers for fighting back.
4. At times, life is unfair..
I just had a read through some of his posts, and I can't help but think MMP's talk of losers so often is somewhat correct. He was beating the whole lot of you people like flys. Why, is it that you people are soooo weak? Maybe instead of resorting to below the belt attacks, you could stop and have a look at what your own weaknesses are. Then you may have a better quality of life here, huh?
Originally posted by HandyAndy1. In theory it was in place, but to my knowledge it had never been enforced (not even in one case in which the offender knew about it and repeated the offence), and it has never been made public in a way which would reach most users.
Some observations:
1. A zero-tolerance policy on privacy and anonymity at RHP is probably necessary, but apparently there was not such a policy in place when the FatLady Incident occurred.
2. FatLady's penalty is excessive and should be rescinded.
3. The sad irony of this situation is that the rancorous MerchantParkPro continues to vilify and mali ...[text shortened]... n, without reprimand, while FatLady suffers for fighting back.
4. At times, life is unfair..
2.-4. Agreed.
Originally posted by DeepThoughtMMP's name was not published on RHP Faces. I only ever display the member's RHP username... unless, of course, a user has provided more information in a caption for the photos.
Yes, I know - but did Fat Lady post information that was available on this site? If FatLady only posted stuff in MMP's profile then there is no reason for a ban at all. I'm not defending MMP's activities for a second but I don't think you can construct a defence for Fat Lady based around provocation, or around what MMP was doing; he was trying to provo ...[text shortened]... he could reasonably expect people from this site to find out his name.
My point was that he had PM'ed me at RHP and signed his PM with his real name, which on the surface is not something that a person wanting to remain anonymous is likely to do. On the other hand, it is also no reason for me or anyone else to post that information onto a public forum.
One cannot defend what Fat Lady did. Rules are in place for a reason.
But in deciding on a punishment, many things should be taken into account. The admins must decide whether a three year ban on a community-minded, constructive member of RHP is in the interest of this site. They must also decide whether being lenient sets the wrong precedent for other cases that may occur in the future. In whatever they decide, they also need to retain the support of the membership.
No matter what we think about the "victim" in this case, every member on the site has the right to privacy.
Running a site like this is a balancing act. On the forums we only get to see the tip of the iceberg. I'm confident the admins will make the right decision.
While it is clearly unacceptable for a Users personal information to be divulged publicly without their consent, i agree that a 3 year forum ban is not a punishment befitting the 'crime'. I've been here 2 years now and have seen some really offensive stuff posted by various people, none of which received a penalty this severe. I think it's unfair that FatLady has been singled out in this way for such a harsh penalty. Yes, the TOS have been breached and a punishment has to be applied, but a two week ban would serve the same purpose. FatLady has never to my knowledge flamed anyone in the forums, to receive a three year ban for a first offense is just madness.