Rule Question for AH_MOD. Forum guidelines, item 4, phrase "anyone, for that matter"

[jsmiam]

Rule Question for AH_MOD. Forum guidelines, item 4, phrase "anyone, for that matter"

http://www.literotica.com/support/forum_rules.shtml

Wouldn't item 4 apply to anyone, anyone at all? Including a person referring to themselves? By letter of the rules, you can't identify yourself either.

I'm not taking sides in the current turmoil. Simply pointing out the rules. They are very clear.

If you were to enforce the rule uniformly, you would: Require a screen name change. Delete all posts declaring "this is my real name". Think hard about the implications, that a potentially real person is specifically identifying themselves, and on top of that, making some unambiguous accusations of major crimes committed by several of their family members.

You has liability, says the legal Lolcat. Even if you know (hypothetically of course) that or if the person is fictitious, they are presenting themselves as if they are real. Rules are being broken, and not being addressed.

 

[SusanJillParker]

You got me...trouble maker.

My real name is...jsmiam.

Small world, huh?

 

[SusanJillParker]

By the way genius who is not taking sides, SusanJillParker is my legal writing name.

Susan Jill is my name but my last name is a Czech name.

I'd have to be an idiot to post my real name on these boards, especially after I've been hounded and terrorized by men like you and your kind.

There, that pretty much solves the legal issue now doesn't it?

I'm allowed to post under my professional writing name, am I not or do you have a problem with that too, jsmiam?

 

[SusanJillParker]

Now as far as my issues of sexual abuse, even though all of that truly happened, being that no charges were filed, no laws were broken.

Without going into specifics that are none of your business, there were reasons why no charges were filed.

So, the bottom line is that you can either take me at my word or call me a liar as do that others. I really don't care.

Merry fucking Christmas to you too, asshole.

 

[SusanJillParker]

You may not post personal information of other members does not state that you may not post your own frigging name, Sherlock.

How do I know jsmiam isn't your real name, huh?

Maybe by posting jsmiam, you're posting someone else's name and are therefore in violation of rule #4 yourself. I demand a name change by you immediately.

Are we done here or shall I continue?

 

[HandsInTheDark]

http://www.literotica.com/support/forum_rules.shtml

Wouldn't item 4 apply to anyone, anyone at all? Including a person referring to themselves? By letter of the rules, you can't identify yourself either.

I don't think anyone can hope for strict enforcement of any rule on Literotica. It doesn't have the staff for that. Or the inclination, really. What rules there are seem to exist to keep Lit from being named in lawsuits. Eg, they can be invoked to protect the site, but trying to invoke them to protect yourself or club someone else is a shakier prospect.

Which makes sense. This is online. You are responsible for protecting yourself. If you are harassed (I don't mean online harassment - there are adequate tools to block contact here so there isn't any possibility of being harassed on this site unless you allow it, at which point it ceases to be harassment) then you leaked too much information.

That said, anyone who posts anything like their real name, has it in their email address, mentions their town name, etc. may or may not be breaking rules. But they are certainly an idiot.

tl;dr: you can't use the teacher to get the class clown thrown out of class.

 

[Sammael Bard]

http://www.literotica.com/support/forum_rules.shtml

Wouldn't item 4 apply to anyone, anyone at all? Including a person referring to themselves? By letter of the rules, you can't identify yourself either.

I'm not taking sides in the current turmoil. Simply pointing out the rules. They are very clear.

If you were to enforce the rule uniformly, you would: Require a screen name change. Delete all posts declaring "this is my real name". Think hard about the implications, that a potentially real person is specifically identifying themselves, and on top of that, making some unambiguous accusations of major crimes committed by several of their family members.

You has liability, says the legal Lolcat. Even if you know (hypothetically of course) that or if the person is fictitious, they are presenting themselves as if they are real. Rules are being broken, and not being addressed.

Usernames representing a name doesn't necessarily mean that it's the name of that user. My real name isn't Bard by any stretch of imagination, nor is any poster with a woman's name necessarily a woman. Any posts containing personal information are removed. There are no exclusions.

However, it is possible that the moderator may have missed such posts, so the best thing to do would be to report them with appropriate cause. I'm sure he/she will respond to it.

 

[sr71plt]

http://www.literotica.com/support/forum_rules.shtml

Wouldn't item 4 apply to anyone, anyone at all? Including a person referring to themselves? By letter of the rules, you can't identify yourself either.

I'm not taking sides in the current turmoil. Simply pointing out the rules. They are very clear.

Several of the currently formal forum rules are functionally defunct and haven't been corrected. Rule #6 isn't being enforced as written, and the paragraphs on "nothing will be erased" have been violated here for years, and quite often of late.

 

[sr71plt]

Eg, they can be invoked to protect the site, but trying to invoke them to protect yourself or club someone else is a shakier prospect.

Not if they can be shown not to be followed. I think maybe someone around here has the same false impression of this as you have stated. The site is riddled with copyright violations, for instance. Just waiting to be sued out of existence if there's a concerted effort to cut down on the number of porn sites on the Internet.

Incidentally, a publisher (and Lit. is a publisher) shares equally with an author or poster in liability for a violation. That's why most publishers make their authors obtain and provide written permissions for any copyright use the author doesn't own (and can't prove the author owns, i.e., but a formal copyright document).

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Several of the currently formal forum rules are functionally defunct and haven't been corrected. Rule #6 isn't being enforced as written, and the paragraphs on "nothing will be erased" have been violated here for years, and quite often of late.

The rules here were not written by a lawyer and taking them literally doesn't work.

Rule 13 clearly says they won't delete posts, but that's not what they meant to say. They were saying they won't delete posts FOR YOU because you can do that yourself. Rule 11 makes it clear that they WILL remove posts. It's the same with rules about what's allowed in stories - the stated rules are not clear and the result looks inconsistent.

Rules are irrelevant without moderation. Rules here are like laws - they tell you what you should not do, but they don't mean people won't do them, and they don't mean everyone who does them is going to be punished (or punished equally). Even with a mod you can't hope for that.

Laurel's been clear on this topic - the management is not here to make us all play nice. They'll take steps as they deem fit but making this a working forum is our problem, not the mod's or management's.

Grumping about it is pointless. Ignore is all we have here, so use it, don't depend on anyone else to make the world nice. Rules can't and won't do that.

(I know how to write unambiguous rules, and if I was writing the rules for Literotica, rule one would be "The management (or their appointed moderators) may choose to delete any post or story for any or no reason, but cannot be required to do so."

And that would end arguments.)

 

[jsmiam]

Usernames representing a name doesn't necessarily mean that it's the name of that user. My real name isn't Bard by any stretch of imagination, nor is any poster with a woman's name necessarily a woman. Any posts containing personal information are removed. There are no exclusions.

However, it is possible that the moderator may have missed such posts, so the best thing to do would be to report them with appropriate cause. I'm sure he/she will respond to it.

Thanks Sammael. I get this strange feeling you may know AH_Mod? I won't ask you to forward though, I'll send directly. Below, a fun screenprint, but anyone can run this search in Google. If the posts were to somehow be edited, the cache will remain for several days after. What the search is doing, is looking for susanjill parker AND the phrase, not just the words "real name" and limiting the search to forum.literotica.com

susanjillparker "real name" site:forum.literotica.com

EDIT, 5 minutes later: or even better (I have to retract my "genius" statement though, since I didn't do THIS as the screen print earlier. (62 hits above on "real name", 14 hits on "birth name")

susanjillparker "birth name" site:forum.literotica.com

As you can see, I totally misrea... Umm, no, wait... I just misunders... No, no, didn't do that either. I was slightly off ba... Ummm... no, not that either. What's that thing called, where a person is totally right? I think I was called a Genius earlier, whoever said that, thanks!

 

[sr71plt]

You're showing how new you are here, Hands. The rules were followed for decades. (Other than the copyright violation ones, and I suspect copyright violation just isn't understood by this Web site. Judges get a real kick out of the "We put up a sign defense" on all sorts of issues.) The erasing that I saw started no more than three years ago--in the Editors forum. The real erosion of the rules regarding the AH came with the institution of moderation, which happened, like ten minutes ago.

And I'll note that you've been here for like only five minutes and aren't in much of a position to know anything about Literotica.

 

[JKendallDane]

9. Flooding the forum with posts, screen-breaking text, or images - or bumping old threads - and/or any non-substantive activity with the intent of disrupting the forum is prohibited.

Not naming any names, but...



.

 

[jsmiam]

Not naming any names, but...



.

Not sure if you meant me or not... I said something. It was refuted. And I refuted the refuter. But yeah, I suppose if could be construed differently. I debated whether to bother with any of it. I do agree, SusanJillParker isn't the real name, but since it's been presented by SusanJill AS SusanJill, I thought repeating her words was OK.

It would be nice if ALL the posts were deleted. I won't contribute to the bumping of any of these posts back to the top any longer. EDIT===> (I forgot a smiley yesterday, won't make THAT mistake again!)

EDIT number 2: A smiley for Sammael. Without bumping the post to the top again. Something needed to be said, I said it, I'm done.

 

[sr71plt]

Not sure if you meant me or not... I said something. It was refuted. And I refuted the refuter. But yeah, I suppose if could be construed differently. I debated whether to bother with any of it. I do agree, SusanJillParker isn't the real name, but since it's been presented by SusanJill AS SusanJill, I thought repeating her words was OK.

It would be nice if ALL the posts were deleted. I won't contribute to the bumping of any of these posts back to the top any longer. EDIT===> (I forgot a smiley yesterday, won't make THAT mistake again!)

My reading was that that was for Freddie.

 

[Sammael Bard]

Like I said, report those posts (by clicking the report button) if you want to see them removed.

Unless, the sole purpose of your thread is to stir the pot and do nothing meaningful except bemoan the loss of moderation.

 

[JKendallDane]

Not sure if you meant me or not... <snip>

Definitely not meant for you.

My reading was that that was for Freddie.

Mmmmm....maaay~be!

.

 

[AH_Mod]

The bottom line is that the post this thread is referring to was an attempt to troll or discredit another member.

The only other interpretation is that the post was believed to be true, in which case it is divulging personal information of another member.

Neither is acceptable.

Now, I'm going to close this thread, because it is a direct outgrowth from a deleted post, and thus has no place on the public forum. Anyone who has questions or concerns can feel free to bring them to me via private message, or take them to Laurel. She wrote the rules, and she knows how she means for them to be interpreted.