RHP's Official Lost Subscription Counter™

Originally posted by Executioner Brand
And starting a witch hunt is what? If it was really that bad why didn't you send it to a mod or site feedback?

Hopefully someone will.

Originally posted by Executioner Brand
And starting a witch hunt is what? If it was really that bad why didn't you send it to a mod or site feedback?

This has already been explained.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
On the contrary i really do think you would benefit from a lengthy forum ban.

So, you've had some time to think. Do you think abusers have a right to keep their abusive behaviour secret and, to that end, that the people they abuse have some obligation to cooperate in keeping the abuse secret?

Originally posted by FMF
So, you've had some time to think. Do you think abusers have a right to keep their abusive behaviour secret and, to that end, that the people they abuse have some obligation to cooperate in keeping the abuse secret?

There are two issues here, one whether its pertinent to keep the contents of a private message secret because it contains what is alleged to be abuse, whether you have abused the trust that was put in you by revealing the content of a private correspondence which was entrusted to you.

Abuse itself can take many forms. In this instance you have publicly admitted that you felt no threat whatsoever, one is therefore under duress to ask, just how abusive was this text? did the sender call you names? did they threaten you with physical abuse? Just how likely was it that they could carry out their aims? In doing so we shall be more able to judge whether or not this alleged abuse really constituted abuse or whether it was simply bluster.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
There are two issues here, one whether its pertinent to keep the contents of a private message secret because it contains what is alleged to be abuse, whether you have abused the trust that was put in you by revealing the content of a private correspondence which was entrusted to you.

What "right to confidentiality" do you think abusers have?

Originally posted by FMF
What "right to confidentiality" do you think abusers have?

Please see my edited text, we have only your word for it that the text contains abuse. Just what was the nature of this alleged abuse?

Originally posted by FMF
What "right to confidentiality" do you think abusers have?

It depends on the nature of the alleged abuse.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Just what was the nature of this alleged abuse?

You are not one of the people I chose to share it with for the reasons I gave earlier in the thread.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
we have only your word for it that the text contains abuse.

Huh? Why on earth would I have passed it on to other regular posters if it WASN'T abusive and if it DIDN'T contain threats? You must live in a peculiar interpersonal landscape if you are assuming that the message in question contained no abuse and no threats and yet got passed on for others to see regardless.

Originally posted by FMF
You are not one of the people I chose to share it with for the reasons I gave earlier in the thread.

yes because its none of my business but that does not prevent you from telling us the nature of the abuse without revealing its actual contents.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
It depends on the nature of the alleged abuse.

So in certain cases you now concede that abusers do not have a "right to confidentiality"? Good. We have progress. You have been separated from your catchphrase approach.

Originally posted by FMF
Huh? Why on earth would I have passed it on to other regular posters if it WASN'T abusive and if it DIDN'T contain threats? You must live in a peculiar interpersonal landscape if you are assuming that the message in question contained no abuse and no threats and yet got passed on for others to see regardless.

This is circular reasoning, an appeal to your own authority. Personally I think you passed it around to humiliate the sender.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes because its none of my business but that does not prevent you from telling us the nature of the abuse without revealing its actual contents.

But I'm not going to tell you, robbie. So you are free to be "not interested" and to feel it is "none of your business" as you have repeatedly asserted.

Originally posted by FMF
So in certain cases you now concede that abusers do not have a "right to confidentiality"? Good. We have progress. You have been separated from your catchphrase approach.

Perhaps but it remains to be seen.

Originally posted by FMF
But I'm not going to tell you, robbie. So you are free to be "not interested" and to feel it is "none of your business" as you have repeatedly asserted.

Ok then we shall never know the nature of the alleged abuse and whether it actually constitutes abuse or not and thus I am free to maintain my position that you betrayed a trust.