From My Informant: The Perils of Socialcam

[_3sheets2thewind]

DCP wrote:
I've just learned something new. "Socialcam,"of which I'd never before heard, announces on Facebook if you've watched something on it. I got a Facebook notice earlier today that a friend had watched something that seemed . . . er, questionable. Surprised that he would watch it, but REALLY surprised that he would (as I thought) choose to ANNOUNCE that he had watched it, I watched it, too, to see if there was something funny or significant in it that would lead him to want to announce it to all of his Facebook friends. (There wasn't.) And now I find that I'VE seemingly chosen to announce that I watched the same thing -- which, at least, helps me to understand what happened to my friend (but is, otherwise, slightly embarrassing and quite irritating). My apologies. I've got lots of shortcomings, but this kind of stuff isn't among them.

hmmmm, willingly watching a video with "Boner" and "booty shaking" in title is not the kind of stuff that is a shortcoming of DCP? Sorry but that does not cut the mustard.

Now, if the video had been "2 girls 1 cup", or DCP had visited "meatspin dot com", or lemon party there would be some leeway, as each of those titles is pretty tame. Face it, Dan, eventually we all get busted for knowingly and willifully watching naughty videos.

[_harmony]

He works for BYU. Knowing how totally stupid the church is about their image, this could cost him his job. I don't wish that on anyone.

[_RayAgostini]

hmmmm, willingly watching a video with "Boner" and "booty shaking" in title is not the kind of stuff that is a shortcoming of DCP? Sorry but that does not cut the mustard.

There are lots of people who don't watch porn, including many ex-Mormons. There are lots of non-Mormons who don't watch porn, and many who are unfamiliar with "sexual slang", such as the term boner. If he was genuine that "that stuff" isn't part of his make-up, it's possible (though I'm not saying this was the case) he was unfamiliar with the term as applied sexually. I decided to watch it, apparently the "long version", all 63 seconds of it, and a bulging male crotch up against J-Lo's ass isn't any compelling reason to immediately switch off, even for a Mormon.

My ex-wife, who was a convert to the Church at 21, in her mid-20s did not know what the "c-word" was. I had to explain it to her, and she insisted she'd never heard the term (of course we both came from the "purer" '50s generation).

There are a lot of crude assumptions being made here, without considering that not everyone thinks, knows or assumes the same things as "porn" and "sexual slang experts".

I got off Facebook when I realised that privacy there was just another Zuckerberg joke. Nothing is really "private" including all the photos you post, and all the information you willingly reveal about yourself. It's Orwell's 1984 come true.

Should the FBI Be Allowed to Wiretap Facebook?.

[_thews]

Actually, Dan already spoke for himself on Facebook. He is no longer a member of this community by his own choice. I am sure that if he chose to speak for himself here, he could do so.

Dan ran away when he was backed into a corner and chose to flee... that's what happened.

This is not a case of my "backing Dan at any cost" because I do not do that. There are things that I have disagreed with Dan on, and not backed him on. The issue as far as how he treated Eric comes to mind.

You always back Dan... always. To claim that you don't could lead to he-said she-said arguments if I chose to look them up, but you always have Dan's back.

It is amazing to me that you are now choosing to pigeon hole me, and painting me with a certain brush simply because you have now chosen to attack me.

While you play the pity card and claim I'm "attacking" poor pitiful you, the only thing I'm "attacking" is your insincerity and presentation of a false witness regarding Mormonism as being Christian when it's not. For example:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=24099

I believe that the traditional Christian POV is that God created the human race. Their souls are simply a part of them, just like their bodies are. All men are fallible, and in need of being "born again", or accepting of Christ in order to be saved, or to live with God in the hereafter. There is not a pre-existance, in the way that LDS believe in it.

You so easily tell us what you don't believe in regarding the Mormon faith, but refuse to explain what is you do believe in? Why is that? You package your plastic testimony in a futile attempt to appease your agenda by selling Joseph Smith's doctrine as Christian, yet you don't believe in it... do you? Here... I'll bump this again:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=22681

I have as much right to comment on this thread as anyone else. And, frankly, I was speaking as someone who also has a Facebook account and is unfamiliar with some of the apps involved like Socialcam.

Comment all you wish... I have a right to counter. You have Dan's back, you have Joseph Smith's back claiming the little 16 year old girls "tempted" him, and you never explain what it is you do believe... know why? I do. You can call your minions now, but know this:

http://biblelight.net/false-prophets.htm

2 Pet 2:1 [NIV] But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2 Pet 2:2 [NIV] Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
2 Pet 2:3 [NIV] In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

[_DarkHelmet]

He works for BYU. Knowing how totally stupid the church is about their image, this could cost him his job. I don't wish that on anyone.

We're having some fun here with DCP's socialcam misfortune, but I don't think anyone here thinks it reflects on his character and should result in any kind of discipline. I doubt anyone here even considers that video to be porn. But you make a good point that BYU and the church may make a mountain out of a mole hill on this issue. I hope that's not the case, but I'm sure many BYU faculty would consider that video porn.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

In any case, this was the screencap I was sent:

(Moderator Note)in real life picture and Facebook caption deleted.

I can only imagine how mortifying this must be for Dan. Thanks to the nature of cyberspace, his "indiscretion" will be around forever.

Frankly, I don't believe his "curiosity" claim for a second. I think he believed he could check out the video (boner, J-Lo's butt, and everything in between) without repercussion, so he watched it. The video really was harmless. For most it is no big deal at all. But since Dan uses in real life information (always a risky thing on the Internet, despite Bob's attacks against anonymity), and is a well known BYU prof. and Mopologist, even this kind of harmless viewing can have serious consequences. I hope it doesn't for Dan, but Mormons have so many sexual hang-ups that his superiors might overreact to something as silly as this. Most guys would want to view a video with the words "boner" and "J-Lo" in the title, even guys like Dan who claim not to have such "shortcomings," but it really is just natural and harmless. You're a normal guy, Dan, so no need to try and offer an unbelievable alternative to a very typical and normal act.

[_sock puppet]

You would think with Dan's extensive experience formulating and shoveling apologetic excuses, he could have come up with something more believable than his excuse about checking out what SocialCam had reported a friend of Dan had viewed.

Watch the video, Dan. Enjoy it. Bump and grind, and all. But please, enough with the excuses. With this one, you make yourself look like a prude and you insult the intelligence of everyone who hears or reads it. Before you clicked to watch, you had the same picture in the SocialCam report of your friend's viewing that we see reporting your viewing. You knew the type of content from that picture, and you went ahead and clicked to watch it anyway. Gee, Dan, admit you enjoyed watching it. It is your only avenue for any credibility with regards to this episode in your online dalliances.

You told us you held in your hands the mythical 2nd Watson Letter, read it with your own eyes, as you also claimed 6 other NAMIRS types did. Now, you are trying to claim you did not do more than view to check out a video that the pre-click picture portrayed quite clearly the type of its contents. Were there 6 other NAMIRS types watching your computer monitor with you when you checked out the boner video?

[_sock puppet]

He works for BYU. Knowing how totally stupid the church is about their image, this could cost him his job. I don't wish that on anyone.

We're having some fun here with DCP's socialcam misfortune, but I don't think anyone here thinks it reflects on his character and should result in any kind of discipline. I doubt anyone here even considers that video to be porn. But you make a good point that BYU and the church may make a mountain out of a mole hill on this issue. I hope that's not the case, but I'm sure many BYU faculty would consider that video porn.

BYU disciplining DCP for viewing this video would be lamer than his proffered excuse for why he viewed it.

[_Bond James Bond]

So who is the friend and were they trying to cure their SSAD?

[_Yoda]

He works for BYU. Knowing how totally stupid the church is about their image, this could cost him his job. I don't wish that on anyone.

We're having some fun here with DCP's socialcam misfortune, but I don't think anyone here thinks it reflects on his character and should result in any kind of discipline. I doubt anyone here even considers that video to be porn. But you make a good point that BYU and the church may make a mountain out of a mole hill on this issue. I hope that's not the case, but I'm sure many BYU faculty would consider that video porn.

This is honestly what I worry about. BYU is notorious for being stupid. I would hate to see a good professor like Dan get penalized, or, at worst, fired over something this insignificant.