legal threats/actions, death threats, etc

Discussion in 'gV engineering' started by nina, 23 Jul 2011.

  1. Maryanne

    Maryanne Running Naked through the Forums going "Wheee!"
    Balanced

    Yeah, see, that's always a tricky bit to manage. When does a "threat" cross the line from someone blowing off steam to something actually threatening? There are way too many shades of gray at work for any one blanket rule to cover all scenarios. The Wad & Mulch show I took as Comedy Gold with no real danger of anyone actually being hurt. But what if Wad really HAD shown up with a sniper rifle?? I wouldn't be laughing so much any more. And as a moderator, how do you decide which threat is credible and which one is pure hogwash??

    We can argue whether Wasted's actions warranted a warning/infraction/banning as compared to someone else's actions til the cows come home. Is he a mentally unstable person with paranoid delusions about SL? Or is he a genius-level troll with a knack for taking and holding the spotlight for extended periods, spewing venom and vitriol and bullshit with near impunity? Or is he something else entirely?? And how do you decide which is the 'real' WE?? And which threat do you respond to seriously and which ones do you ignore??
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Chaos_Factor

    Chaos_Factor Flying Leprechaun
    Sick

    Actually, only a judge, not a lawyer can make Nina give your information.

    To an outsider, there's no way of knowing if your claim that Don 'stalked' you had any merit or not. So it's not 'clearly a real life threat'. We have your word to go on, nothing more. Same with him. He obviously felt strongly enough that he had credible evidence against you. He took legal action, you didnt. If he gets banned, or even 'dinged' for doing so, and it turns out that he's not lying and you are... that WILL backfire on Nina. Does she want to take that chance? Up to her.

    We dont know.

    The point is, that threats of legal action should not be allowed. Action, on the other hand is a whole different matter.

    Chances are, if someone is threatening legal action, they arent planning on following through. They're running their mouth. If they really DO feel the need to take legal action, they will do so quietly. I dont believe that said legal action should even be discussed on the forum, regardless of who filed and who it's against. It could possibly hurt both plantiff and defendant's cases to do so.

    I would support 'punishment' of those running their pixels across the screen simply to stir up drama. I, however, will not sign my right to take legal action, if deemed necessary, away... at all. I wouldnt expect anyone to, including the owners/admin of the site.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Earth

    Earth Interface Unit

    discussion split.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. nina

    nina still prettier than you
    Nerdy

    stalking threats and legal threats are apples and oranges.
    fwiw, i had no intention of moving against wasted. ive always viewed his threats as comedy theatre, and nothing to be taken seriously. thats why the scores of reports against him have largely gone unactioned.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. nina

    nina still prettier than you
    Nerdy

    anybody that threatened legal action prior to that letter had the advantage of not having that incident colour their threat. since the time of that letter the mood has changed in regard to legal threats.
    a double standard is not being formed. what is happening is gV is shifting its stance on the issue of legal threats. the intent in this (now) thread is to get community feedback and guage how far that new stance will extend.
    threatening gV = goodbye
    threatening members = ?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Lain

    Lain End of line. #resist
    Sneaky

    The clear threat I'm discussing is the Fester incident. It was clearly a threat. He POSTED his intent to this board and clearly was stalking me in real life. The evidence spans at least two public forums, anything else being said about that incident is pure bullshit.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  7. Lain

    Lain End of line. #resist
    Sneaky

    Then the choice is clear. Legal threats can't be tolerated by anyone, against any member of the community.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Lain

    Lain End of line. #resist
    Sneaky

    Not really. They are both forms of emotional blackmail. The intent of posting them is to scare someone into doing something they wouldn't otherwise, or to stop them from doing something that the subject feels is inappropriate and unwanted.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Jolene

    Jolene Sarah's Apparent Alt
    Amazed

    I see. So I have no ability to know what he thinks, but YOU know what I think?

    I don't really HAVE to guess at the meaning when it's right there in words.

    You are the one that is attributing it to something other than the words written.

    Bottom line. Threats of any legal action should be dealt with as serious by whomever does it.

    Otherwise, YOU are asking for one set of rules for that user, and another for the rest of us.

    Obviously I think that this would encompass past legal threats, as well.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Lias

    Lias Open Community!
    Arsey

    No, I know that no one in Span can get any police to investigate someone in Australia because of allegations of supporting asslickers.

    The meaning is that some police force on planet Earth will track down and interrogate Nina in Australia because she is harboring Second Life asslickers. Which, of course, is nonsense.

    I am contributing it to the exact words writeen - which make no sense whatsover.

    When MadameG launched all of her lawsuits to her haters at SLU and Second Citizen - her access to those forums were taken away from her (actually MadameG was the person that destroyed the real Second Citizen forum - The owner deleted every post and user account because of her lawsuits) . It seems a sound legal move to eliminate the legal risk. But an attorney versed internet liability would be best to figure that out.

    The owner of gV cannot delete everyone that threatens fellow posters with legal actions. If the legal actions include the owner - then I think the person could be deleted. But we are all going to have to get a copy of a new terms of service to back such new rules in (which I don't mind signing).

    There is only one person in that category - and he is probably alting by now.
     
  11. Clancy

    Clancy The drama is better at Hungry Jack's
    Diggingit

    Make and run a forum, and see how you feel when a Wasted Engineer-type mental case flings crap into your face for granting him the right to babble like a madman in that forum. Then, come tell us all about how you handled it. What insights will you give us? Oooh, can't hardly wait to hear.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  12. Chaos_Factor

    Chaos_Factor Flying Leprechaun
    Sick

    I'd agree with you on Fester, however, you throwing Don into the equation muddies the waters you're trying to say are crystal clear.
     
  13. Chaos_Factor

    Chaos_Factor Flying Leprechaun
    Sick

    I'd agree there and that is why I said that posting a 'threat' of any kind should be actionable... the action of actually taking legal action vs someone stalking are two different things, though.

    Someone stalks you in real life, file legal action. Get a restraining order or whatever needs to be done. Forward said restraining order to the admin of the site and then and only then should the admin take action against a user. Otherwise you're getting in the middle of he said / she said drama and bullshit.

    A site should not block or attempt to block anyone from taking legal action against anyone else if the person feels the need to do so. Threats of the same are different... they're just running off at the mouth and are more than likely attempting 'emotional blackmail' as you discussed.

    Words are one thing, actions are another. I wouldnt expect anyone to attempt to take anyone else's real life rights away. A forum can moderate and 'punish' based on words, it has that right. It doesnt have the right to tell anyone that they can / cannot seek legal actions.

    Example: Party A hacks Party B. Party B can prove Party A hacked and did X amount of dollars of damage (affected files, etc). Party B has a right to recoup losses in a court of law by Party A. No one has the right to tell them they dont.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Lias

    Lias Open Community!
    Arsey

    Are you serious? That's your response? I run forums. Every forum has That Guy that wears the tinfoil hat and is exciteable. If they do not get positive attention then they will seek negative attention. I see no reason to reinforce the negative when positive is right there at your fingertips.
     
  15. Clancy

    Clancy The drama is better at Hungry Jack's
    Diggingit

    Yeah, I run forums, too, and the Vatican, and the Illuminati. I just can't show you proof, must protect my identity. But, I see no reason why I cannot refer to my vast experience at running stuff even though I might just be imagining that I run anything besides my mouth. Got a problem with that? Tell it to the judge.

    And now, I am done talking to you about Wasted Engineer's slap on the wrist from gV's unfair, heartless admin.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  16. Lias

    Lias Open Community!
    Arsey

    Of course.
     
  17. nina

    nina still prettier than you
    Nerdy

    lets try to remain on topic and civil.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  18. Lain

    Lain End of line. #resist
    Sneaky

    I feel I should clarify my previous statements.

    I don't think we should ban anyone for making stupid posts wherein they threaten legal action, mostly because it's stupid and there's no point in caring. On the off chance that someone sends a letter it has proven it will be dealt with in a fashion that seems to suit most of the population here. No one is going to be able to blackmail Nina into doing anything she doesn't want to do. That's a good thing.

    IF you're going to enforce a ban/infraction rule over threats, it needs to be uniform and all threats of whatever nature need to be squelched you shouldn't pick and choose which ones you decide to lend merit to. Either the threat itself is an offense, or it's not. Merit or action-ability cannot be accounted for as it's impossible to ascertain.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  19. Liona Clio

    Liona Clio Poetry in Motion
    Benevolent

    I have a brilliant idea. Why don't we let the MCP, who is the actual authority in gV, make the decisions on who needs corrective action and what corrective action to take?

    The Court of Public Opinion is a farce. We do not set rules here, the owner of the forum does. If you do not like the decision the owner makes regarding infractions or banning, you can either tolerate the ruling, post somewhere you feel more comfortable...or bitch endlessly about unfair acts that are in the end none of your business.

    Sorry, nina...I know you're looking for a discussion on the merits of infractions against legal threats here. My opinion is that I should trust in the admins of any forum I post in. If the MCP makes a decision about restricting or banning a user...Hey, it's their house. We are only guests...and we should try to act like we're guests.

    And if we cannot tolerate a forum's policy, we should leave. I would be very sad if, upon considering that, a large number of gVers pulled up roots because they can't handle even a hint of authority.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  20. Clancy

    Clancy The drama is better at Hungry Jack's
    Diggingit

    Ideally, rules can be uniformly enforced. But, rule-breakers aren't uniform in their behaviour. At times, some amount of judgment is required to be performed by even the most fair of forum admins. I believe Nina has done her best, and wants to be fair as possible regardless of her own personal opinions of belligerent forum members.

    In my opinion, Wasted Engineer total behaviour from day #1 through his absurd yet harassing threats of legal action, qualify this person for the lunatic asylum. But, all that a forum admin can do is give time-outs and ban.
     
    • Like Like x 6

Share This Page