What constitutes in real life information and what is the punishment?

[_Scottie]

As requested, this is a thread to discuss what we should consider posting of in real life information and what should be done to the perp.

Here are the problems that need to be discussed as I see them.

We have posters who go by their real names. Will Schryver, Daniel Peterson, Paul Osborne, Ray A, etc.

We have certain posters who may post under a pseudonym, but their name is pretty well known. Runtu may be the best example of this. He is quite commonly addressed as "John", and doesn't seem to mind. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

We have posters like myself who use a form of their first name, but I don't particularly want my last name being used. It sounds as if Trevor is in this same position.

Then we have posters like beastie and Jersey Girl who appear to want complete anonymity.

Next, we have the subject of where the line is drawn as to what constitutes in real life information. Is it just name? Is it geographic information on where you live? Is it gender?

So, given these questions, what should the ruling be and what should the punishment be for breaking this ruling? And, if it can be shown that the poster used the offensive in real life information in an earlier post, is it considered "out there" now, or should we all take pains to keep it private?

What say ye?

[_Jersey Girl]

Just a correction...

Then we have posters like beastie and Jersey Girl who appear to want complete anonymity.

I do desire anonymity however, my first name is on this board. My main concern is that the rights of all to their anonymity and not to be harrassed with personal in real life information, contact information, etc, be upheld.

Example, if your name is publicly known here such as, I believe, your name is Scottie. I don't want to see people posting that you got a speeding ticket, or what have you, on the ground, because they dug it up somewhere.

[_MCB]

Perhaps the individual could put their preferred level of anonymity in their signature, and the consequences for violating that would be judged accordingly. And, of course, that can change as people test the waters.

[_Scottie]

As I was pondering this just now, I'm wondering if this might be blown up a bit more than it should.

An incident doesn't necessarily reflect a pattern. Rules are typically implemented when a pattern is observed.

Perhaps I've just missed them, but how many issues have we had? I can only think of the Eric/DCP, the Crockett issue and this one. 3 problems in how many years?

Is it worth all this fuss?

I'm not saying it isn't, just asking the question. If the answer is YES, it IS worth all the fuss, then I say we go ahead.

[_Some Schmo]

I like what Jersey Girl suggested in the other thread: a tiered punishment for repeated offenses (lengths to be determined).

1st offense: 2-4 weeks
2nd offence: 3-6 months
3rd offense: Eternal banishment to MAD with a 4 week requirement to suck up to DCP

Personal information would be anything the poster has not her/himself divulged on this board. Plain and simple.

[_Scottie]

I like what Jersey Girl suggested in the other thread: a tiered punishment for repeated offenses (lengths to be determined).

1st offense: 2-4 weeks
2nd offence: 3-6 months
3rd offense: Eternal banishment to MAD with a 4 week requirement to suck up to DCP

Personal information would be anything the poster has not her/himself divulged on this board. Plain and simple.

What it if has been divulged on other boards?

[_beastie]

As I was pondering this just now, I'm wondering if this might be blown up a bit more than it should.

An incident doesn't necessarily reflect a pattern. Rules are typically implemented when a pattern is observed.

Perhaps I've just missed them, but how many issues have we had? I can only think of the Eric/DCP, the Crockett issue and this one. 3 problems in how many years?

Is it worth all this fuss?

I'm not saying it isn't, just asking the question. If the answer is YES, it IS worth all the fuss, then I say we go ahead.

We've also had a couple of cases of posters displaying real pictures of other posters without permission.

[_Molok]

Is it worth all this fuss?

I'm not saying it isn't, just asking the question. If the answer is YES, it IS worth all the fuss, then I say we go ahead.

In my opinion, no this is not worth all the fuss. I think the board can work out problems such as this by itself.

[_beastie]

I like this from another board:

Other than your own, personal information is not to be posted here at the AF. Personal information is defined to mean information that can be used to identify a private person's real-life identity, address, phone number, employer, etc., without their permission. If the person has posted that information themselves for some reason, it is not an offense to quote them. If it is common public information, such as contact information for public figures such as politicians, it will also not be considered an offense.

I think moderators have enough common sense to recognize when personal information can be used to identify a person's real-life identity. Referring to someone's wife and children, for example, is too generic to be useful. Referring to someone as an "apostate" is also useless.

However, I would add something about the use of information on this board in order to contact or harass posters or posters' families in real life is also an offense.

[_Jersey Girl]

With regards to names...I might be the quirkiest poster on this board about screen names/real names, but here goes.

I know tons of first and last names of posters who use screen names on this board, but I recognize that people use screen names for a variety of reasons and I never, repeat never, refer to them by anything else but their screen name on this board. In the same sense, I use a screen name and on rare occasions I sign off with a first name. Virtually the only instances in which I do so, are when I am responding to someone who has known me for a long time and who (I think) is in need of a heartfelt response. I use a first name as a sign of sincerity in my expression. At other times, I might use a variation of my first name for comedic purposes.

If someone hasn't told you directly, "You can call me (real name) on the board", then the only right thing to do is address the person by their screen name. Simply using the name in one's post isn't giving permission for others to use it.

It's not unlike a professional courtesy in which you know your superior's first name and refrain from using it publicly because it sends an unprofessional/casual message regarding your professional relationship.

I know that this doesn't quite fall into the topic, but since Scottie included it in his OP, I wanted to address it.