Lonestar...you did nothing wrong...nobody ever said you did.
Was it CBJ too?
Hi beautifulThanks so much for the post, it really got me to thinking. You make a very valid point.
Isn't this the exact same dilemma that the men have regarding women spreading malicious info about them whether it be true or false in the back channels or ladies room?
I recall commenting on a thread someone posted about this very subject some time ago. A reputable provider responded that some things cannot be controlled but the men should trust that the other providers have been around long enough to recognize BS when they see it. Should the same thing not apply to the men's locker room? Originally Posted by Codybeast
Once again I am posting this message for ALL. It is not the private info you have, it is what you do with it. if you come across any private info, do not use it on ECCIE or we will enforce the rules and you will find yourself banned. Originally Posted by SP Hunter
thanks space for the explanation. but what of the WK who let her know? is he to be punished. the reason i ask is if my atf were to have a review posted on her with activities that i KNOW are clearly not part of her normal menu, am i bound by this "guy code wall of silence" and let her suffer for what she clearly had nothing to do with and obviously has no knowledge of. or should i let her know so she can alert a mod and have me pointed or worse banned. where does a hobbyists loyalty lay. to seeking the truth in reviews or towards his brothers no matter the cost to the lady Originally Posted by knotty manIf a lasy in this circumstance reveals the source, then he is punished. For the second part see SP's post below.
Once again I am posting this message for ALL. It is not the private info you have, it is what you do with it. if you come across any private info, do not use it on ECCIE or we will enforce the rules and you will find yourself banned. Originally Posted by SP Hunter
So if I am understanding that correctly then you are stating that it is Not a violation to pass ROS info on to the provider but rather that the violation is her publicly using the info on Eccie. Is that interpretation correct? Originally Posted by CodybeastIf you pass that info on to someone without access and we don't know it does the violation exist (Wow, now we are going all Nietzsche on this one). No. But say she sends the OP an e mail, text, etc letting him know she knows. He forwards that e mail, text, etc to a Mod and it can be verified then it is a violation.
If you pass that info on to someone without access and we don't know it does the violation exist (Wow, now we are going all Nietzsche on this one). No. But say she sends the OP an e mail, text, etc letting him know she knows. He forwards that e mail, text, etc to a Mod and it can be verified then it is a violation. Originally Posted by Spacemtn
So it remains -- who's the (feminine hygiene product) who leaked what he/she thought to be in the secure area to the provider? And why did you lie to her at that? Originally Posted by Yssup RiderWellllll then...maybe there was no violation after all, seeing as nothing that was in ROS was actually leaked, just a false statement about something that wasn't.