>Boy, seems you've really researched this!
Naaaa. Not really. I'm just a computer geek who's been around for a long, long time. I have read the Pricavy Policy, though, as I usually do at most sites, especially one that I would register my personal information with.
>Our privacy
>policy pertains in the manner that I would not release your
>personal info to your company, as in your email address,
>real name etc, UNLESS you have already posted it yourself.
It pertains to a lot more than releasing information to my company. It pertains to publically releasing any user's private infomation without their expressed permission. Publishing a user's IP address would violate that policy.
>
>However, I am perfectly free, for example, if I were to say
>"This person has 3 ID's they use" if you are causing trouble
>and attacking other members.
Perfectly free, to be sure. Not exactly all that professional to stoop to the same level as that of the goober who created multiple ID's, but perfectly free, nonethless.
>This is covered under the rule
>that states a members first post cannot be to attack
>someone, or some company.
I have no problem with that rule. The offending posts should be deleted, the user warned about creating new ID's and making first-post attacks, and then the user themselves banned if they do it again, at least if they don't make a non-attacking first post first, that is.
>I'm not talking about invasion of
>privacy, I'm talking about someone who creates a new
>membership soley to attack. Those memberships can, and will
>be deleted without warning from now on. If the behavior
>continues, the member will be suspended, or banned.
Good. But the posting of an IP address is, in fact, an invasion of privacy. It's a relatively simple thing to garner whatever information you wish about someone if you know their IP address, even easier if it's static. There are tools that can be used to learn anything you want to know about someone (and a lot you'd rather not know about them hehe).
The public releasing of a user's IP address, enacted in revenge or in a vengefull manner, is not only unprofessional, but would instantly erode any and all trust the users have in this site. Even to threaten to do so gives me (and others) pause. It's a demonstration of an unbalanced power. It's as if to say, 'Not only do we control you, and can we ban you from the site, but we can go much, much further if we feel like it.' A little disturbing, to say the least.
The creation of a new thread threatening the entire forum populace with the outing of their personal information if they broke a rule seemed a little over the top to me. I'd have just banned the offending user(s) with my big stick and been done with it, rather than feel the need to wave my big stick over everyone's head, just to make sure they don't get out of line.
>
>Posts are not deleted because we disagree with them.
>They are deleted because a poster flamed another poster,
>advocated something illegal, or posted against EO's forum
>rules.
>
Weeeeelllll, OK. If you say so.
>>
>>Personally, I'd rather read it all, the good, the bad, and
>>the ridiculously ugly, and then use my own mind, rather than
>>be protected (or worse, muzzled) from something
>>disagreeable.
>
>
>That then is the difference between a moderated forum,
>and a completely open forum. This is why we have
>moderators. We will not delete posts because we disagree.
But, you'll flat out lock a thread up right quick if you don't like where the thread is going, or if you feel that the topic has been discussed to death already (ignoring the presence of new users that haven't been there done that). I'm well aware of what a moderator does. Been there, done that, got the sweatshirt, from the Web, Usenet and ARPANET. (yeah, I'm an old fart. Well, older, anyway.) I'm also aware that you should moderate your forums in whatever manner you see fit. The only thing I (or any reasonable users) ask is that it be moderated consistently, and if there is an inconsistency that crops up, it should be fully explained to all users (in as much as it can be fully explained, of course).
>We will however, delete posts that are against our rules,
>are disruptive, or flat out flaming another poster. This is
>a board for professionals.[/b]
Blatant rule violations are obvious to almost everbody, and I'm not advocating a free-for-all or unrestricted free speech on a private forum such as this one. But where I have a problem is the sometimes-broad interpretation of what constitues "disruptive", especially when it's on the General forum. Anything pertaining to the expediting industry, disruptive or not, fits the topic description of that board (provided it's not a blatant violation of the AUP).
Also, not that it matters, but to get to the forums, I have to click a button labelled
Open Forum.
I just think that's too funny.
