Re: [Good Citizen]

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:10 pm

Rashmun wrote:
There was not even the slightest criticism directed at HA even though other posters did criticize him for his misbehavior.

rashmun -- i am DEAD serious about privacy. but i am also goal oriented when it comes to such things. grandstanding is all fine, but when any poster faces privacy threats here, we need action not rhetoric. and the quickest way to get it done is make a request to the one person here who has admin privileges. everything else is irrelevant.

by Idéfix Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:14 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:and the quickest way to get it done is make a request to the one person here who has admin privileges. everything else is irrelevant.

I completely agree. There have been several instances where such requests have been made and acted upon quickly, in accordance with the policy that has been in effect for over a year now. And the policy was arrived at as a result of discussions within the community. Everyone -- including Jerji and Rashmun -- knows that a large fraction of Rashmun's posts about privacy were an attempt to get back at the poster panini press or charvaka by association with his other identity as Admin, just like he sought to get back at him through his other identities by randomly attacking Charvakas, Telugus, etc.

by bw Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:16 pm

Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

by Idéfix Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:19 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

Hopefully he doesn't start disclosing your personal information like he did the last time he got cornered by you. After all, that is the way both JM and Rashmun have been trying to get people to censor themselves.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:19 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
There was not even the slightest criticism directed at HA even though other posters did criticize him for his misbehavior.

rashmun -- i am DEAD serious about privacy. but i am also goal oriented when it comes to such things. grandstanding is all fine, but when any poster faces privacy threats here, we need action not rhetoric. and the quickest way to get it done is make a request to the one person here who has admin privileges. everything else is irrelevant.

The quickest way is not to contact PP because PP might not be around when HA or someone else posts private information of another poster. PP is not around on this site 24*7. The quickest way is to identify rogue posters who violate the norms of privacy and to make it clear to them that their behavior is unacceptable. HA was clearly chastened in the thread about him violating the privacy of other posters. He did not indulge in his ugly behavior for several months at least.

Further, the mollycoddling of the rogue posters who habitually violate the privacy of other posters--like you have been seen to do--should be avoided. The reason you continue doing the mollycoddling is not difficult to ascertain. They know your private details as well and you have decided to wink at their unethical border line criminal behavior since if you reprimand them publicly it could backfire on you.

Huzefa Kapasi says he has stopped communicating with Hellsangel after he again and again kept posting private details of JM. One would have expected you to do the same if you really believed in maintaining privacy of posters. You don't dare to do this because unlike HK you are not a self employed businessman. People like PP and HA can actually cause you professional damage if you annoy them in any way since they know your identity. To put it crudely they have you by your balls.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:20 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

you spoke against him on chat, not in a forum post. at least not to my recollection. same for max.

by Idéfix Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:22 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

The truth is, everyone has freedom to say what (s)he wants to here. My personal information has been disclosed here more often than any other poster's. And it has been done as part of a very explicit attempt to shut me up, by the two posters who whine the most about this topic.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:23 pm

panini press wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.
Hopefully he doesn't start disclosing your personal information like he did the last time he got cornered by you. After all, that is the way both JM and Rashmun have been trying to get people to censor themselves.

i wanted bw to know that i am respecting her privacy. the reference to multan could be a reference to multani mitti or to multani chicken or to multani fish or to multani flora and fauna.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:24 pm

Rashmun wrote:

i wanted bw to know that i am respecting her privacy. the reference to multan could be a reference to multani mitti or to multani chicken or to multani fish or to multani flora and fauna.

daakter sahab, halat bigadti ja rahi hain, abki baar injection dijiye.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:25 pm

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
There was not even the slightest criticism directed at HA even though other posters did criticize him for his misbehavior.

rashmun -- i am DEAD serious about privacy. but i am also goal oriented when it comes to such things. grandstanding is all fine, but when any poster faces privacy threats here, we need action not rhetoric. and the quickest way to get it done is make a request to the one person here who has admin privileges. everything else is irrelevant.

The quickest way is not to contact PP because PP might not be around when HA or someone else posts private information of another poster.

...Blah blah and more blah..

. People like PP and HA can actually cause you professional damage if you annoy them in any way since they know your identity. To put it crudely they have you by your balls.

Ring-a-round a rosie,
A pocket full of posies,
Ashes! Ashes! We all fall down

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:26 pm

panini press wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

The truth is, everyone has freedom to say what (s)he wants to here. My personal information has been disclosed here more often than any other poster's. And it has been done as part of a very explicit attempt to shut me up, by the two posters who whine the most about this topic.

i have never disclosed your name although i have certainly given links to forum posts on sulekha where you posted under your purported real name and where you posted your comments to my philosophy posts for instance. i have advised you to write to sulekha to get them to remove your purported real name from the posts but you have chosen not to exercise your right to do so. I know for a fact that they have done this for other posters. your blogs on sulekha are also available under your real name. if you do not wish to protect your privacy then that is your choice.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:27 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i wanted bw to know that i am respecting her privacy. the reference to multan could be a reference to multani mitti or to multani chicken or to multani fish or to multani flora and fauna.

daakter sahab, halat bigadti ja rahi hain, abki baar injection dijiye.

From Bollywood Aunty to Trashy Aunty. What a disappointment.

by Propagandhi711 Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:28 pm

Hellsangel wrote:And so it begins - the great dotting of our time.

it's good to have dotting ewwery couple of posts, gets rid of the crazies just barely enough so he can take the pill and function again.

by Idéfix Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:28 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i wanted bw to know that i am respecting her privacy. the reference to multan could be a reference to multani mitti or to multani chicken or to multani fish or to multani flora and fauna.

daakter sahab, halat bigadti ja rahi hain, abki baar injection dijiye.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:30 pm

panini press wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i wanted bw to know that i am respecting her privacy. the reference to multan could be a reference to multani mitti or to multani chicken or to multani fish or to multani flora and fauna.

daakter sahab, halat bigadti ja rahi hain, abki baar injection dijiye.

PP idiot i know you read my posts so here is another one lol!

by bw Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:30 pm

Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote: And i think JM has a point when he says that you might be feeling intimidated in taking on PP, HA et al lest your private information also starts getting posted in forum posts.

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

you spoke against him on chat, not in a forum post. at least not to my recollection. same for max.

here's one:

https://such.forumotion.com/t674-admin-can-see-your-ip-address#5792

i dunno how to look up threads on the old sulekha jungle.

i do not care about "friends" or "foes" when it comes to disagreeing/agreeing with people on issues. if people are mature enough to deal with it, fine. instead if they start "oh we were friends and how could you do this to me?", bah!

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:31 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:And so it begins - the great dotting of our time.

it's good to have dotting ewwery couple of posts, gets rid of the crazies just barely enough so he can take the pill and function again.

Look who is here. the guy who specializes in abusing children of other posters.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:37 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:

rashmun, do you really think everyone here is living in fear of PP and that's why no one joins you in slamming him? i think you are letting your personal vendetta with PP cloud your judgement.

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

you spoke against him on chat, not in a forum post. at least not to my recollection. same for max.

here's one:

https://such.forumotion.com/t674-admin-can-see-your-ip-address#5792

i dunno how to look up threads on the old sulekha jungle.

i do not care about "friends" or "foes" when it comes to disagreeing/agreeing with people on issues. if people are mature enough to deal with it, fine. instead if they start "oh we were friends and how could you do this to me?", bah!

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

by Idéfix Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:37 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:you spoke against him on chat, not in a forum post. at least not to my recollection. same for max.

here's one:

https://such.forumotion.com/t674-admin-can-see-your-ip-address#5792

i dunno how to look up threads on the old sulekha jungle.

i do not care about "friends" or "foes" when it comes to disagreeing/agreeing with people on issues. if people are mature enough to deal with it, fine. instead if they start "oh we were friends and how could you do this to me?", bah!

I am glad you posted this. I liked how you responded to that situation, both on old CH and here. If you want to look up threads on old CH, go to google and put in site:indiapulse.sulekha.com and then the keywords you remember.

by bw Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:42 pm

Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

the comment was addressed specifically to Max. i would have addressed it to everyone if i meant to address it to everyone. Please do not distort the content of my post.
You are free to have your opinion on PP. I know that you are great friends with Hellsangel--someone i completely despise because of his penchant for revealing private information of other posters repeatedly. Till date you have not bothered to correct him on this presumably because of your own personal vendetta against JM.

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

you spoke against him on chat, not in a forum post. at least not to my recollection. same for max.

here's one:

https://such.forumotion.com/t674-admin-can-see-your-ip-address#5792

i dunno how to look up threads on the old sulekha jungle.

i do not care about "friends" or "foes" when it comes to disagreeing/agreeing with people on issues. if people are mature enough to deal with it, fine. instead if they start "oh we were friends and how could you do this to me?", bah!

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

i wasn't referring to just HA there. i don't really want to discuss that on this thread because that is a totally different topic.

i pointed that out that thread to you to "prove" to you that i have indeed spoken openly against HA regarding privacy violations.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:42 pm

Rashmun wrote:

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

he revealed a lot of bw's private info. does that count, or no?

by b_A Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:45 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Is that how you console yourself? That the many posters are the One poster?

it is a fact that in polls on this forum one can keep creating multiple handles and keep voting.

For argument sake let's say you are correct and one kept creating multiple handles and kept voting against you. But one can't stop your supporters from voting for you. If you had any supported they would've voted for you. But for some of the polls you didn't receive more than 2 votes ( you and your other handle). Even JM didn't vote for you. How did this happen ? Rigging by the admin to cancel votes cast in your favor ?
The funniest poll was if you or QB is better admin for your forum and there also you just got VB's vote. There is no worse ignominy in my opinion.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:45 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

he revealed a lot of bw's private info. does that count, or no?

he did not reveal her purported real name. there is no way of anyone knowing who she is. nobody can damage her in any way. What HA was doing could have resulted in professional damage to JM.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:46 pm

b_A wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Is that how you console yourself? That the many posters are the One poster?

it is a fact that in polls on this forum one can keep creating multiple handles and keep voting.

For argument sake let's say you are correct and one kept creating multiple handles and kept voting against you. But one can't stop your supporters from voting for you. If you had any supported they would've voted for you. But for some of the polls you didn't receive more than 2 votes ( you and your other handle). Even JM didn't vote for you. How did this happen ? Rigging by the admin to cancel votes cast in your favor ?
The funniest poll was if you or QB is better admin for your forum and there also you just got VB's vote. There is no worse ignominy in my opinion.

more important discussions taking place right now. come some other time.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:47 pm

bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
bw wrote:

really? just the other day, you posted saying max and bw spoke against him. why change that view now? coz i am not on your side?

you spoke against him on chat, not in a forum post. at least not to my recollection. same for max.

here's one:

https://such.forumotion.com/t674-admin-can-see-your-ip-address#5792

i dunno how to look up threads on the old sulekha jungle.

i do not care about "friends" or "foes" when it comes to disagreeing/agreeing with people on issues. if people are mature enough to deal with it, fine. instead if they start "oh we were friends and how could you do this to me?", bah!

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

i wasn't referring to just HA there. i don't really want to discuss that on this thread because that is a totally different topic.

i pointed that out that thread to you to "prove" to you that i have indeed spoken openly against HA regarding privacy violations.

yes you made your point and i stand corrected and i apologize for my error.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:47 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

he revealed a lot of bw's private info. does that count, or no?

he did not reveal her purported real name. there is no way of anyone knowing who she is. nobody can damage her in any way. What HA was doing could have resulted in professional damage to JM.

the info that was never shared in public by her. he knew she wanted to keep it private. harmful info or not, it's a breach of trust. agree?

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:51 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

he revealed a lot of bw's private info. does that count, or no?

he did not reveal her purported real name. there is no way of anyone knowing who she is. nobody can damage her in any way. What HA was doing could have resulted in professional damage to JM.

the info that was never shared in public by her. he knew she wanted to keep it private. harmful info or not, it's a breach of trust. agree?

i do not know the full details of what happened between JM and bw. There may have been some genuine misunderstanding.

by b_A Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:55 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
panini press wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:sold his soul
Is that finally going to get him some authentic perdition?
<br /><br />All dogs go to heaven.

by Propagandhi711 Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:55 pm

there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. it is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. it is the middle ground between light and shadow, between akbar and nizam, and it lies between the pit of a man's failed phd and the summit of his psychosis. this is the dimension of dotting. it is an area which we call "the douchemun zone".

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:56 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

i have no issues with your approach of being totally frank in sharing your views. i have never liked people pussyfooting around myself.
I will just state that JM has never used the private information of HA in forum posts to my knowledge. JM did it to PP but that was like a last resort. In your post you state that 'JM has his ways of using private information'. I am not sure what you meant by this because i have never seen JM use the private information of HA in any forum posts.

he revealed a lot of bw's private info. does that count, or no?

he did not reveal her purported real name. there is no way of anyone knowing who she is. nobody can damage her in any way. What HA was doing could have resulted in professional damage to JM.

the info that was never shared in public by her. he knew she wanted to keep it private. harmful info or not, it's a breach of trust. agree?

i do not know the full details of what happened between JM and bw. There may have been some genuine misunderstanding.

are you going to try and find out?

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:57 pm

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:

he revealed a lot of bw's private info. does that count, or no?

he did not reveal her purported real name. there is no way of anyone knowing who she is. nobody can damage her in any way. What HA was doing could have resulted in professional damage to JM.

the info that was never shared in public by her. he knew she wanted to keep it private. harmful info or not, it's a breach of trust. agree?

i do not know the full details of what happened between JM and bw. There may have been some genuine misunderstanding.

are you going to try and find out?

not interested. the issue seems to have now been resolved since they are not fighting any more.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:59 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

he did not reveal her purported real name. there is no way of anyone knowing who she is. nobody can damage her in any way. What HA was doing could have resulted in professional damage to JM.

the info that was never shared in public by her. he knew she wanted to keep it private. harmful info or not, it's a breach of trust. agree?

i do not know the full details of what happened between JM and bw. There may have been some genuine misunderstanding.

are you going to try and find out?

not interested. the issue seems to have now been resolved since they are not fighting any more.

they are not fighting? really? if u say so.

by Guest Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:59 pm

Propagandhi711 wrote:there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. it is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. it is the middle ground between light and shadow, between akbar and nizam, and it lies between the pit of a man's failed phd and the summit of his psychosis. this is the dimension of dotting. it is an area which we call "the douchemun zone".

Propa i don't have any children. Go find someone to abuse who has children. (We know you specialize in abusing children of other posters.)

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:00 am

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Vidya Bagchi wrote:

the info that was never shared in public by her. he knew she wanted to keep it private. harmful info or not, it's a breach of trust. agree?

i do not know the full details of what happened between JM and bw. There may have been some genuine misunderstanding.

are you going to try and find out?

not interested. the issue seems to have now been resolved since they are not fighting any more.

they are not fighting? really? if u say so.

i have not observed them fighting. perhaps because i have been participating in so many fights myself.

by Propagandhi711 Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:07 am

Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. it is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. it is the middle ground between light and shadow, between akbar and nizam, and it lies between the pit of a man's failed phd and the summit of his psychosis. this is the dimension of dotting. it is an area which we call "the douchemun zone".

Propa i don't have any children. Go find someone to abuse who has children. (We know you specialize in abusing children of other posters.)

douchemun, dont have children as you'll most likely damage them. take a cue from your GBF's life

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:10 am

Propagandhi711 wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. it is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. it is the middle ground between light and shadow, between akbar and nizam, and it lies between the pit of a man's failed phd and the summit of his psychosis. this is the dimension of dotting. it is an area which we call "the douchemun zone".

Propa i don't have any children. Go find someone to abuse who has children. (We know you specialize in abusing children of other posters.)

douchemun, dont have children as you'll most likely damage them. take a cue from your GBF's life

in my opinion i will make a better father than you. the proof of this is that you are forever ready to abuse children of other posters while i would not even do this in my dreams.
What have the innocent children done to you that you should wish to shower them with filthy abuses?

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:14 am

Rashmun wrote:
The quickest way is to identify rogue posters who violate the norms of privacy and to make it clear to them that their behavior is unacceptable.

chastising someone and getting them to modify their behavior is never going to work here. that too if YOU are the one doing the chastising. let's get that out of the way to begin with.

Rashmun wrote:Further, the mollycoddling of the rogue posters who habitually violate the privacy of other posters--like you have been seen to do--should be avoided.

can you show me an instance when i have "mollycoddled" anyone? the only person i've probably mollycoddled is you because of a feeling of pity that i cannot help.

Rashmun wrote:The reason you continue doing the mollycoddling is not difficult to ascertain. They know your private details as well and you have decided to wink at their unethical border line criminal behavior since if you reprimand them publicly it could backfire on you.

i get the sense that everyone knows everyone else's identity here and i am the only exception in that i don't know anyone's identity. i find this place interesting enough to hang around. i also get the sense that it is impossible to hide oneself no matter how hard one tries. reprimanding will get exactly zero results. what is the goal here?

Rashmun wrote:Huzefa Kapasi says he has stopped communicating with Hellsangel after he again and again kept posting private details of JM. One would have expected you to do the same if you really believed in maintaining privacy of posters. You don't dare to do this because unlike HK you are not a self employed businessman. People like PP and HA can actually cause you professional damage if you annoy them in any way since they know your identity. To put it crudely they have you by your balls.

you can believe what you want, but no amount of reprimanding (i'll still call it ranting) on your part got JM's private info removed from here. as i recall the chain of events, it was my pointing it out to PP that got that info off these pages. huzefa is no paragon of virtue. i find it laughable that you hold him up as some kind of model citizen and suck up to him. by his own admission he broke into JM's notes at sulekha. nobody is immune from trouble due to disclosure of personal information here. we're all in the same boat.

by b_A Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:22 am

Rashmun wrote:
b_A wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Is that how you console yourself? That the many posters are the One poster?

it is a fact that in polls on this forum one can keep creating multiple handles and keep voting.

For argument sake let's say you are correct and one kept creating multiple handles and kept voting against you. But one can't stop your supporters from voting for you. If you had any supported they would've voted for you. But for some of the polls you didn't receive more than 2 votes ( you and your other handle). Even JM didn't vote for you. How did this happen ? Rigging by the admin to cancel votes cast in your favor ?
The funniest poll was if you or QB is better admin for your forum and there also you just got VB's vote. There is no worse ignominy in my opinion.

more important discussions taking place right now. come some other time.

Is this another way of saying you don't don't have a valid argument ? Speculating on my id is the first way.

by Propagandhi711 Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:23 am

Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. it is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. it is the middle ground between light and shadow, between akbar and nizam, and it lies between the pit of a man's failed phd and the summit of his psychosis. this is the dimension of dotting. it is an area which we call "the douchemun zone".

Propa i don't have any children. Go find someone to abuse who has children. (We know you specialize in abusing children of other posters.)

douchemun, dont have children as you'll most likely damage them. take a cue from your GBF's life

in my opinion i will make a better father than you. the proof of this is that you are forever ready to abuse children of other posters while i would not even do this in my dreams.
What have the innocent children done to you that you should wish to shower them with filthy abuses?

The key is "in my opinion"...in you're opinion, you are a fine individual, an intellectual and great lover of arts that everyone admires..women want to be with you and men want to be you. In reality, you're a nut, two posts from staring into space, muttering to self while riding the bus to your psychiatrist.

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:30 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
The quickest way is to identify rogue posters who violate the norms of privacy and to make it clear to them that their behavior is unacceptable.

chastising someone and getting them to modify their behavior is never going to work here. that too if YOU are the one doing the chastising. let's get that out of the way to begin with.

Consider the public shaming of HA in this thread:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4792-regarding-hellsangel-s-persistent-usage-of-purported-real-names-of-posters-he-disagrees-with#38099

This public shaming had actually worked. for several months after this i do not believe HA ever violated the privacy of anyone. It was my thread but the people chastising him on this thread were not just me but several other posters (for instance truthbetold).

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Further, the mollycoddling of the rogue posters who habitually violate the privacy of other posters--like you have been seen to do--should be avoided.

can you show me an instance when i have "mollycoddled" anyone? the only person i've probably mollycoddled is you because of a feeling of pity that i cannot help.

--> Far from mollycoddling me you gave an ugly display of temper and declared that you would no longer communicate with me on subjects like music and the arts. Of course you have the right to do so but please do not call this mollycoddling.

--> The example of mollycoddling i have in mind is when you continued to remain completely cordial and friendly with HA when he only recently revealed private information of JM. At least some criticism of his behavior was in order considering that he is apparently your friend and considering he has been doing this on a habitual basis. It seems your friendship with him outweighs the normal standards of ethics which one expects you to uphold.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:The reason you continue doing the mollycoddling is not difficult to ascertain. They know your private details as well and you have decided to wink at their unethical border line criminal behavior since if you reprimand them publicly it could backfire on you.

i get the sense that everyone knows everyone else's identity here and i am the only exception in that i don't know anyone's identity. i find this place interesting enough to hang around. i also get the sense that it is impossible to hide oneself no matter how hard one tries. reprimanding will get exactly zero results. what is the goal here?

The goal is to eliminate or minimize the posting of private information of posters on this forum. i believe reprimanding is important because it enables a person to change his point of view on privacy itself.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Huzefa Kapasi says he has stopped communicating with Hellsangel after he again and again kept posting private details of JM. One would have expected you to do the same if you really believed in maintaining privacy of posters. You don't dare to do this because unlike HK you are not a self employed businessman. People like PP and HA can actually cause you professional damage if you annoy them in any way since they know your identity. To put it crudely they have you by your balls.

you can believe what you want, but no amount of reprimanding (i'll still call it ranting) on your part got JM's private info removed from here. as i recall the chain of events, it was my pointing it out to PP that got that info off these pages. huzefa is no paragon of virtue. i find it laughable that you hold him up as some kind of model citizen and suck up to him. by his own admission he broke into JM's notes at sulekha. nobody is immune from trouble due to disclosure of personal information here. we're all in the same boat.

HK has claimed that he has changed his view on privacy after having discussions on this subject with bw and others. He has never posted private information of JM on this forum and for this i respect him.

by Jeremiah Mburuburu Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:31 am

panini press wrote:Incidentally, JM has told me several times to stop posting here. And he tried to get me to do that by threatening my privacy.

i merely made you poop in your pants by asking whether you should compensate your company - i referred to it with three initials, not the name by which it is known - for stealing time from it and using its equipment to harass posters every day. i was kind to you.

you formulated a privacy policy a year and a half after you started this forum, while during all that time, privacy had been routinely violated in front of your eyes, by people you incite. in other words, you changed the rules of the game to protect your own arse, and at same time, to restrict freedom of expression.

i requested you to stop posting here when you enquired if there were any admin requests. you asked, i told you; i did, because you're lethally boring.

it was interesting to watch you shit in your pants, lie, and display your hypocrisy.

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:33 am

Propagandhi711 wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Propagandhi711 wrote:there is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. it is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. it is the middle ground between light and shadow, between akbar and nizam, and it lies between the pit of a man's failed phd and the summit of his psychosis. this is the dimension of dotting. it is an area which we call "the douchemun zone".

Propa i don't have any children. Go find someone to abuse who has children. (We know you specialize in abusing children of other posters.)

douchemun, dont have children as you'll most likely damage them. take a cue from your GBF's life

in my opinion i will make a better father than you. the proof of this is that you are forever ready to abuse children of other posters while i would not even do this in my dreams.
What have the innocent children done to you that you should wish to shower them with filthy abuses?

~~The key is "in my opinion"...in you're opinion, you are a fine individual, an intellectual and great lover of arts that everyone admires..women want to be with you and men want to be you.~~ In reality, I am a ~~you're~~ a nut, two posts from staring into space, muttering to self while riding the bus to ~~your~~ my psychiatrist.

Propa one reason i believe you are a nut is when you confessed to Huzefa Kapasi on this forum that you hate--genuinely hate--most people on this forum. Another reason why i consider you a nut is because you have been found to abuse the children of other posters. Innocent children who have done you no harm have been savagely abused by you using the filth that seems to constantly emanate from your mouth.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:45 am

Rashmun wrote:
Consider the public shaming of HA in this thread:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4792-regarding-hellsangel-s-persistent-usage-of-purported-real-names-of-posters-he-disagrees-with#38099

and i have said what i wanted to say on that thread. so what's your point?

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:47 am

lol.. first rashmun complains max never condemned. then he himself posts the proof of him doing so. uff rashmun.

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:51 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Consider the public shaming of HA in this thread:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4792-regarding-hellsangel-s-persistent-usage-of-purported-real-names-of-posters-he-disagrees-with#38099

and i have said what i wanted to say on that thread. so what's your point?

i have also said whatever i wanted to say in my posts so far.

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:53 am

Vidya Bagchi wrote:lol.. first rashmun complains max never condemned. then he himself posts the proof of him doing so. uff rashmun.

my recollection was that max had slammed HA on chat but not in a forum post. i was wrong. remember that the thread is an year old. i gave the link to it to show that it had a genuine impact and was not simply a rant.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Feb 08, 2013 12:54 am

Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Consider the public shaming of HA in this thread:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4792-regarding-hellsangel-s-persistent-usage-of-purported-real-names-of-posters-he-disagrees-with#38099

and i have said what i wanted to say on that thread. so what's your point?

i have also said whatever i wanted to say in my posts so far.

maybe you didn't understand. you posted a thread where we seem to have discussed public disclosure of private information, and then went on a rant and said i was silent about it. on that very thread i have expressed my opinion about this issue and you seem to have not only quoted me but agreed with me. why do you then say that i remained silent? what am i missing?

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 1:00 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Consider the public shaming of HA in this thread:

https://such.forumotion.com/t4792-regarding-hellsangel-s-persistent-usage-of-purported-real-names-of-posters-he-disagrees-with#38099

and i have said what i wanted to say on that thread. so what's your point?

i have also said whatever i wanted to say in my posts so far.

maybe you didn't understand. you posted a thread where we seem to have discussed public disclosure of private information, and then went on a rant and said i was silent about it. on that very thread i have expressed my opinion about this issue and you seem to have not only quoted me but agreed with me. why do you then say that i remained silent? what am i missing?

the thread is an year old. since the rogue poster persisted in revealing private information of another poster only recently one would have expected you to offer some criticism to the rogue poster to make it clear to him that his behavior is not acceptable. After all, the person at the receiving end was your old friend JM, and secondly the rogue poster is apparently also your friend. if you have no wish to interfere in this matter any more the least one would expect is for you not to mollycoddle the rogue poster immediately after he does his dirty deed because when you do this you help rehabilitate the rogue poster. JM has earlier speculated that your timid behavior is the consequence of the fact that your private information is available with PP and HA.

by Guest Fri Feb 08, 2013 1:08 am

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:
panini press wrote:Incidentally, JM has told me several times to stop posting here. And he tried to get me to do that by threatening my privacy.
i merely made you poop in your pants by asking whether you should compensate your company - i referred to it with three initials, not the name by which it is known - for stealing time from it and using its equipment to harass posters every day. i was kind to you.

you formulated a privacy policy a year and a half after you started this forum, while during all that time, privacy had been routinely violated in front of your eyes, by people you incite. in other words, you changed the rules of the game to protect your own arse, and at same time, to restrict freedom of expression.

i requested you to stop posting here when you enquired if there were any admin requests. you asked, i told you; i did, because you're lethally boring.

it was interesting to watch you shit in your pants, lie, and display your hypocrisy.

good post.

by MaxEntropy_Man Fri Feb 08, 2013 1:11 am

rashmun -- i have no friends here. do you think the people here are friends? i have news for you. i don't know about you, but it takes a lot more to win my friendship.

and i'm sorry i'm not voluble enough to satisfy you. i made my opinion absolutely clear in that thread. i have no desire to keep repeating myself ad nauseam.

oh and btw, what is this thing about quoting JM from sulekha and here incessantly? i'm curious.

by Sponsored content

Hitskin.com