Originally posted by SeitseFMF,
What a lack of class. Private messages are, well, private. Except for swines.
Why did you not address this post? It is valid.
A private message is just that, private. The sender of a private message assumes that the recipient will treat it as such....private, and not to be 'forwarded to friends'.
If you did not like the content of the message, or felt threatened, then you deal with RHP.
Your excuses why you felt 'okay' with breaking confidentiality are weak and cowardly.
Your 'hiding' from seitse is noted.
Originally posted by chaney3I have already explained - several times - exactly why I don't think there is any obligation to keep a poster's "private" abuse and threats "secret". Perhaps you skipped past those posts?
FMF,
Why did you not address this post? It is valid.
A private message is just that, private. The sender of a private message assumes that the recipient will treat it as such....private, and not to be 'forwarded to friends'.
If you did not like the content of the message, or felt threatened, then you deal with RHP.
Your excuses why you felt 'okay' with breaking confidentiality are weak and cowardly.
Your 'hiding' from seitse is noted.
There is more on this here: Thread 170533
Originally posted by chaney3I've already told Suzianne, in public, that any abusive and threatening PMs from her will be forwarded to other posters here so they can read them. So now she knows.
A private message is just that, private. The sender of a private message assumes that the recipient will treat it as such....private, and not to be 'forwarded to friends'.
Originally posted by FMFAs I stated, you deal directly with RHP.
I have already explained - several times - exactly why I don't think there is any obligation to keep a poster's "private" abuse and threats "secret". Perhaps you skipped past those posts?
There is more on this here: Thread 170533
You do NOT share a 'personal message' with friends.
It is wrong, and you need to be told that it's wrong.
Originally posted by chaney3The content of the message was ludicrous. It contained threats but, of course, I didn't actually feel threatened. Why should I "deal with RHP"? They didn't send the PM; Suzianne did.
If you did not like the content of the message, or felt threatened, then you deal with RHP.
Originally posted by FMFSo by your own admission, you did not feel 'truly' threatened.
The content of the message was ludicrous. It contained threats but, of course, I didn't actually feel threatened. Why should I "deal with RHP"? They didn't send the PM; Suzianne did.
And, it was Suzianne, who you know.
Yet, you shared her PM.
Your excuse is falling apart badly, right now. And, it's a very weak, poor excuse.
You owe Suzianne an apology for what you did.
Originally posted by chaney3If you have an actual argument why an abusive person's behaviour must be kept secret by the target of that behaviour, then present it.
So by your own admission, you did not feel 'truly' threatened.
And, it was Suzianne, who you know.
Yet, you shared her PM.
Your excuse is falling apart badly, right now. And, it's a very weak, poor excuse.
You owe Suzianne an apology for what you did.
Originally posted by FMFPerhaps I could be mistaken, but being mistaken is not the same as deliberately lying, is it. Do you normally term people who have a different recollection than you liars? Its really rather unsavoury. Here you are having betrayed a confidential trust and you are pontificating about what is true. Clearly this latest episode is an insight into the darker side of your character and its becoming rather self evdient that you are not a man that can be trusted.
You are a liar. There were no "unpleasant episodes" in personal messages. If there had been, then I wouldn't be objecting to your characterization of them now. If you "cannot recall", and if you had any decency, you would not be making stuff up now to fill the alleged gap in your memory. But I think that you remember full well the nature of our correspondence, and that you are simply lying about it.
Originally posted by FMFMy argument:
If you have an actual argument why an abusive person's behaviour must be kept secret by the target of that behaviour, then present it.
Have the balls to PM Suzianne back and forth as long as is needed to come to terms, or common ground. To dissolve the problem......in a 'private manner'.
You had NO right to share with others. It was not only cowardly, but a breach of privacy.
If you would pause for a moment to realize your error, instead of arguing your fruitless point, you would do what's right:
Apologize to Suzianne.
1 edit
Originally posted by chaney3These are simply statements of your opinion and not arguments. Like I said, if you have an argument why an abusive person's behaviour must be kept secret by the target of that behaviour, then present it.
My argument:
Have the balls to PM Suzianne back and forth as long as is needed to come to terms, or common ground. To dissolve the problem......in a 'private manner'.
You had NO right to share with others. It was not only cowardly, but a breach of privacy.
If you would pause for a moment to realize your error, instead of arguing your fruitless point, you would do what's right:
Apologize to Suzianne.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRegardless of what others might think of your mealy-mouthed "perhaps" this, and "perhaps" that, and "I cannot recall", and "the reason evades me", and "perhaps I could be mistaken", I have marked your card in public on this. And even if that does not outwardly dent your integrity-lite facade - yes, this preening babyman persona you peddle - you now have the uncomfortable reality of knowing that I know - specifically and explicitly - that you are lying about this.
Its not a lie FMF, you have been blocked for aeons. You are free to disagree with the characterisation or anything else but that does not make it a lie. You are blocked for a reason although admittedly what that reason is at present yet evades me. I do recall some pleasant texts but perhaps there was some rather unpleasant episodes as well, I cannot recall now.
Originally posted by FMFRegardless, you are a person who shares PM messages with your friends.
No, I certainly don't normally term people liars in these situations. But I [b]am terming you a liar over your supposed "recollection" of this matter.[/b]
It is called a PM for a reason. Want to know why FMF???
Private.
You are no longer trustworthy.