Well, here's something some of you might find interesting.

[December]

No, he gave up his rights.

Here's a story: I once worked behind a bar in Manchester. One of the barmaids was getting knocked about by the boyfriend. Four of us went down, kicked the fuck out of the boyfriend and moved her stuff to a friend's house. He had rights, we didn't give a fuck. Morality>rights.

Hey man, I get it. Sometimes people are so passionate about an ideal or a person that it becomes a case of them truly believing Morality> rights.

If a guy raped, molested, murdered, etc my child? My momma-bear brain tells me I'd make that man suffer for a very long time. Everything in me gets amped up just thinking about that scenario, my blood pumps harder, I feel antsy and sick to my stomach at the same time. In that moment I am so sure that I would break whatever law I had to break to make that guy suffer and eventually die.

And if that happened? There are probably a heck of a lot of people who would nod their head in approval and say "serves him right".

Unfortunately my actions would still be wrong in that scenario. They might feel right, and feel really good at the time, but they'd still be the wrong actions to take. Nobody said being human instead of caveman/animal was going to be easy.

 

[Sean]

Hey man, I get it. Sometimes people are so passionate about an ideal or a person that it becomes a case of them truly believing Morality> rights.

If a guy raped, molested, murdered, etc my child? My momma-bear brain tells me I'd make that man suffer for a very long time. Everything in me gets amped up just thinking about that scenario, my blood pumps harder, I feel antsy and sick to my stomach at the same time. In that moment I am so sure that I would break whatever law I had to break to make that guy suffer and eventually die.

And if that happened? There are probably a heck of a lot of people who would nod their head in approval and say "serves him right".

Unfortunately my actions would still be wrong in that scenario. They might feel right, and feel really good at the time, but they'd still be the wrong actions to take. Nobody said being human instead of caveman/animal was going to be easy.

Morality always trumps rights. I'm sorry, but you're on a loser here.

 

[Nerdy_Harold]

What rights, exactly? To never have his first name appear on Lit? To have links in a poster's sigline that lead directly to him, but never have anyone mention that? If any poster is concerned about all those psychopaths, they'd be a dipshit to link it in their sig, no? And if they did, why complain about people pointing that out?

It's not that the chance is absolved in my mind. It's that I think if you say "I am not Spartacus," then I'm going to take you at your word and feel free to talk about Spartacus all I want, whether I think you are he or not. I respect your statement. You're not Spartacus. Okay. Karen is not Ken. Okay.

Look, there's a link in my sig to a picture of my body from years ago. If someone were to hotlink it and say "Hey look! This is a picture of Perg!" should I then go screaming to Laurel and demand that no one ever post it again? Does that even make sense? Especially if I claim it's not me? And Laurel could star out any damn thing she wants.

Also, this:

I just fucking said that and I was ignore because I am a noob but I been paying attention to this fiasco.

 

[KRCummings]

Morality always trumps rights. I'm sorry, but you're on a loser here.

No it doesn't.

 

[neci]

I just fucking said that and I was ignore because I am a noob but I been paying attention to this fiasco.

copyright violation.

 

[Sean]

No it doesn't.

Yes, it does. It's the reason dissidents exist.

 

[richard_daily]

I really don't know. For me, the evidence against him was pretty convincing, but ultimately not complete, not for me anyways. I am still not entirely sure KK isn't the actress, nor that KK is neither of them and is actually some kind of evil genius who played a real big dramatic hoax on everyone.

However, if the KK poster is the man everyone thinks he is and did the things everyone says he did, I'm really not sure what his punishment should be. The emotional girlie girl part of me is really icked out by the claims of trying to elicit rape stories to wack off and wants to lash out, but the rational and fair part of me says his punishment isn't up to me anyways. If I did have any say in it though, I think I would want him to publicly admit what he did. I think I'd want a public apology to the young lady in the photos he used, and mandatory psych evaluation. I'd definitely push for that. Maybe a fine of some sort for impersonating the actress without her knowledge.

I don't know though, because I have no idea what the actual facts are. Not truly. Not 100%

No jail time?

I honestly don't have the answer here, as this is relatively new territory with the semi-anonymity of the internet.

That said; It's not like people haven't pretended to be someone else for centuries, in literature, as "actors", which at least one person involved in this debacle is, or just to get one over on people because of their mental instability (that part of the "karen" story is certainly the truth).

People like ken do not ever admit to wrong-doing, anything and everything that they do is justifiable in their eyes... Otherwise, how do you think that he'd be able to live with himself knowing that he tricked several of the older, conservative "gentlemen" on this site into cybering with him? I mean, I guess being from an older generation, I suppose there is still a severe stigma attached to being gay for that age group, but you'd think that there are certainly other outlets.

I'd think that suitable punishment would be an IP ban on any that "karen" ever used, and a sticky at the top of the page for the next year declaring what transpired. Obviously, neither of those is probably going to happen, but that would be my sentence. Since fooling people on literotica clearly meant so much to Ken, cutting him off from his opportunity to just create another alt and start over, would certainly be punishment for him.

Most juries aren't 100% yet they send people to the needle. I'm ok with being 95% on a scumbag pretending to be a woman.
And for the record no, he doesn't have any rights. Literotica isn't the government.

The problem with stating that he has no rights, is that then how are you/we any better than he is?

Just because he took away the rights of other people, doesn't mean that his rights are instantly vaporized... If someone came in and posted his home address, phone number, etc... I would take issue with that.

That said, It's morally ambiguous, because if he had raped someone, and then someone posted his address and phone number, and someone went over there with a baseball bat, I certainly wouldn't feel bad for him.

 

[December]

What rights, exactly? To never have his first name appear on Lit? To have links in a poster's sigline that lead directly to him, but never have anyone mention that? If any poster is concerned about all those psychopaths, they'd be a dipshit to link it in their sig, no? And if they did, why complain about people pointing that out?

It's not that the chance is absolved in my mind. It's that I think if you say "I am not Spartacus," then I'm going to take you at your word and feel free to talk about Spartacus all I want, whether I think you are he or not. I respect your statement. You're not Spartacus. Okay. Karen is not Ken. Okay.

Look, there's a link in my sig to a picture of my body from years ago. If someone were to hotlink it and say "Hey look! This is a picture of Perg!" should I then go screaming to Laurel and demand that no one ever post it again? Does that even make sense? Especially if I claim it's not me? And Laurel could star out any damn thing she wants.

Also, this:

I think maybe the difference in our opinions here is that I think KK is sick. If all of this really is exactly how it all went down, then yeah, I think KK is really sick. Mentally ill on some level, or emotionally ill. Something is just really wrong with KK if this is all true. I think either KK wanted to be caught, or had finally lost a grip on what was real and what was reality and just fucked up because he couldn't keep it all straight any more.

If all of this is true, then ten years? Ten fucking years this went on? Ten years telling the same life stories and maintaining the same personality traits? All of it lies? That isn't a sane person, to me. That isn't a well person.

Anyhow, you have your opinion and I have mine. Our opinions stem from differing perspectives, views, whatever. We're entitled to our differing views. This particular difference isn't a deal breaker for me.

 

[KRCummings]

Yes, it does. It's the reason dissidents exist.

Dissidents are not always right.

 

[Lorilei]

I agree with December in principle, but not this particular reality. For one, this is not a court of law. It's a loose community, and its guidelines are not written in stone. The same standards don't exist. Fairness is great, but tricking people for 10 years is not ok. Not in such a vociferous, intrusive, scummy kind of way. It's not a "prove it beyond a reasonable doubt" situation.

Even if it was a reasonable doubt kind of thing, there's more than reasonable doubt here. If it's not true, KK will be back soon under another name, smarter, and no one will ever know.

Hopefully.

 

[Nerdy_Harold]

Rights?

Where are these rights at so I can bone up on them?

 

[Nerdy_Harold]

Dissidents are not always right.

Only if they win

 

[Sean]

Dissidents are not always right.

Granted. But the right to dissent is usually a good indicator of what went wrong.

 

[KRCummings]

The problem with stating that he has no rights, is that then how are you/we any better than he is?

Just because he took away the rights of other people, doesn't mean that his rights are instantly vaporized... If someone came in and posted his home address, phone number, etc... I would take issue with that.

That said, It's morally ambiguous, because if he had raped someone, and then someone posted his address and phone number, and someone went over there with a baseball bat, I certainly wouldn't feel bad for him.

It has nothing to do with what he has done other than the fact that he was the one that put the information out there in the first place. It's about the fact that he has no rights here. There is no expectation of privacy other than the site owners promising not to release information themselves. Privacy is up to you, nobody else.

 

[Peregrinator]

I just fucking said that and I was ignore because I am a noob but I been paying attention to this fiasco.

Close. It's because you're a noob without a set of tits in your profile. But you do post some good stuff.

I think maybe the difference in our opinions here is that I think KK is sick. If all of this really is exactly how it all went down, then yeah, I think KK is really sick. Mentally ill on some level, or emotionally ill. Something is just really wrong with KK if this is all true. I think either KK wanted to be caught, or had finally lost a grip on what was real and what was reality and just fucked up because he couldn't keep it all straight any more.

If all of this is true, then ten years? Ten fucking years this went on? Ten years telling the same life stories and maintaining the same personality traits? All of it lies? That isn't a sane person, to me. That isn't a well person.

Anyhow, you have your opinion and I have mine. Our opinions stem from differing perspectives, views, whatever. We're entitled to our differing views. This particular difference isn't a deal breaker for me.

Maybe so. I have to say after all of this, including some evidence not publicly announced, I tend to think that the acct was used primarily by the female actress and at times by the three boys. It's the only way I can make everything I've read fit. But there's definitely something odd about the persona. It's inconsistent over time, and not all of the stories can be factual, so there's definitely some level of deception there.

I'm glad it's not a deal breaker. I was going to come to your place and write naughty words on the windows with soap.

 

[KRCummings]

Granted. But the right to dissent is usually a good indicator of what went wrong.

Doesn't matter. Morality is too ambiguous.

 

[richard_daily]

It has nothing to do with what he has done other than the fact that he was the one that put the information out there in the first place. It's about the fact that he has no rights here. There is no expectation of privacy other than the site owners promising not to release information themselves. Privacy is up to you, nobody else.

I disagree. We have an inherent right to privacy as individuals. That applies to government intervention, corporate information gathering, as well as other individuals who seek to take privacy from us.

 

[Sean]

Doesn't matter. Morality is too ambiguous.

No, that's the whole point. Morality is not ambiguous. Something is either right or it's wrong.

 

[December]

I was going to come to your place and write naughty words on the windows with soap.

My kid did that recently, actually. Not only did she do it, but she used two kinds of soap and some mud mask. Liquid soap, bar soap, mud mask. What. A. Mess! She actually made a really neat picture, the three mediums provided some interesting textures, but fuck was it a bitch to clean up. Every time I'd wipe it, more suds, it took hours of wiping layer after layer of sudsy soap away before I finally got all the soap off that window.

I did take a cool picture of the art, and blew it up and framed it. Gave it to my parents for Xmas. I guess it worked out well in the end.

 

[richard_daily]

Close. It's because you're a noob without a set of tits in your profile. But you do post some good stuff.


Maybe so. I have to say after all of this, including some evidence not publicly announced, I tend to think that the acct was used primarily by the female actress and at times by the three boys. It's the only way I can make everything I've read fit. But there's definitely something odd about the persona. It's inconsistent over time, and not all of the stories can be factual, so there's definitely some level of deception there.

I'm glad it's not a deal breaker. I was going to come to your place and write naughty words on the windows with soap.

I would totally hate-mouth-rape Natasha... Just for the record.

 

[Ham Murabi]

Bear with me as I try to explain. The names and relationships have been changed to protect privacy.

Imagine that people thought I was the alt of another poster.

Imagine also that you happen to be friends with atmas, who I think everyone knows is my oldest and closest friend irl.

Imagine that you offer to look at evidence that I'm not an alt and report back to the board.

So I send you a PM and say "atmas will vouch for me, this is my deal."

You reply by saying, "Okay, I'm copying atmas, and if he vouches for you, I'll believe it, because he's someone I trust, and he would definitely know for sure if what you're claiming is false."

Within a few hours, you get a PM from atmas saying, "Yup, that's Perg, and no one else."

That's sort of how it went, as near as I can put it without giving away some confidential stuff.

VatAss is definitely not Ken, Karen, Natasha, Skyler, or what was the other one's name? Puget, or something? In any case, he's not any strand of the Kraft web.

You may trust me on this one. I am absolutely certain of this, and I think eventually someone else will figure it out as well. He may even share some stuff with y'all that indicates how unlikely the Kraft connection would be.

That said, I am not defending his military record--no idea--his attitude--cocky and abrasive--or anything else he does or says. It's not like he's my lover; I just was privy to clear and definitive evidence, and I had promised to report back.

So there you go.

Do you ever stop to think about how much time you spend on Lit?

 

[Peregrinator]

My kid did that recently, actually. Not only did she do it, but she used two kinds of soap and some mud mask. Liquid soap, bar soap, mud mask. What. A. Mess! She actually made a really neat picture, the three mediums provided some interesting textures, but fuck was it a bitch to clean up. Every time I'd wipe it, more suds, it took hours of wiping layer after layer of sudsy soap away before I finally got all the soap off that window.

I did take a cool picture of the art, and blew it up and framed it. Gave it to my parents for Xmas. I guess it worked out well in the end.

Nice. The joys of parenthood. Gosh, what am I missing? I'm going to have to go find some chick who wants my babies right away.

I would totally hate-mouth-rape Natasha... Just for the record.

I'd take the hate out and happily do the same, in a play-rape kinda way. She's a hottie, and I have no reason to hate her.

 

[KRCummings]

I disagree. We have an inherent right to privacy as individuals. That applies to government intervention, corporate information gathering, as well as other individuals who seek to take privacy from us.

The second you put your information out there you've given up any expectation of privacy from people online. Nobody is taking privacy away from a person who gave it up in the first place.

 

[KRCummings]

No, that's the whole point. Morality is not ambiguous. Something is either right or it's wrong.

A very large number of people believe gay marriage is wrong. A majority in many areas.

 

[Peregrinator]

Do you ever stop to think about how much time you spend on Lit?

Yup. These last few days have been a lot of fun. I tend to hang on Lit instead of watching TV, reading magazines, etc. When it starts to cut into reading boos time, I step way back. But even then, there's a good chance that I have a window open to it on my computer so I can walk by and take a look for anything new or interesting.

If you noticed, last week and the week before, I wasn't here much at all. I was teaching, and that's exhausting, so I only managed a couple hours in the evenings.