Can I sue Callie Oettinger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be a shame if someone doxxed her. Give her a taste of her own medicine.

How do you dox someone who is already public? She posts everything under her own name. We know who she is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Instead of taking advice of this self-acclaimed law expert who wants to dissuade everyone from filing suit against Oettinger, I think parents with a data breach should call a real lawyer with a specialty in privacy/digital privacy and ask if there are grounds. If there's grounds, there's probably someone willing to take this on.

I personally have no interest in suing FCPS--that's like shooting your own taxpaying foot IMO. But others may differ.

And a real lawyer will gladly take your money. But no lawyer will take this on a contingency because it’s a loser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This woman is on this thread trying to justify what she did based on the actions of FCPS. Apples and oranges my dear. What FCPS did is akin to manslaughter. What you did is akin to murder. I MIGHT be able to forgive manslaughter. Murder? Never.

You win the Internet for the stupidest analogy ever. Congrats!!!!

NP, the analogy isn't perfect but it isn't -that- bad either. Basically manslaughter is killing with some degree of negligence but not intent, murder is killing with intent. Replace "killing" with "disclosing sensitive data" and the analogy regarding intent basically holds, the only difference being Callie redacted some of the PII in her disclosure (as I understand it). That's an important distinction if the redaction was done properly and thoroughly and why the analogy isn't perfect, but the intentional vs. non-intentional distinction the PP was focusing their analogy on is also really important.

No. It’s terrible. Comparing what she did to murder?

You don't know how analogies work, do you?

Here is a refresher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

The fact that you cited Wikipedia for this instead of a credible source speaks volumes about you, Callie.

I was replying to the person who didn't seem to understand how analogies work (I thought it was a fine analogy).

It was a terrible analogy. As a PSA, don’t use it again. If you repeat it outside of anonymity, people will mock you when you walk away and laugh at you. On second hand, keep using it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be a shame if someone doxxed her. Give her a taste of her own medicine.

How do you dox someone who is already public? She posts everything under her own name. We know who she is.

You’re not dealing with the smartest people in Fairfax county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be a shame if someone doxxed her. Give her a taste of her own medicine.

How do you dox someone who is already public? She posts everything under her own name. We know who she is.

You’re not dealing with the smartest people in Fairfax county.

I think this thread got picked up on Reddit…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the idea of a group lawsuit against her. Even if the only result is she stops foia-ing 10,000 times a month.

I’d lose my mind if I worked there. What a waste of taxpayer dollars answering request and request.

This is my issue.

FOIA laws are good laws. I believe in governmental transparency. I don't believe in FOIA abuse and fishing expeditions, which is what's been going on here. And I certainly don't believe in it when it targets my child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This woman is on this thread trying to justify what she did based on the actions of FCPS. Apples and oranges my dear. What FCPS did is akin to manslaughter. What you did is akin to murder. I MIGHT be able to forgive manslaughter. Murder? Never.

You win the Internet for the stupidest analogy ever. Congrats!!!!

NP, the analogy isn't perfect but it isn't -that- bad either. Basically manslaughter is killing with some degree of negligence but not intent, murder is killing with intent. Replace "killing" with "disclosing sensitive data" and the analogy regarding intent basically holds, the only difference being Callie redacted some of the PII in her disclosure (as I understand it). That's an important distinction if the redaction was done properly and thoroughly and why the analogy isn't perfect, but the intentional vs. non-intentional distinction the PP was focusing their analogy on is also really important.

No. It’s terrible. Comparing what she did to murder?

You don't know how analogies work, do you?

Here is a refresher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

The fact that you cited Wikipedia for this instead of a credible source speaks volumes about you, Callie.

I was replying to the person who didn't seem to understand how analogies work (I thought it was a fine analogy).

DP. Agree that the analogy was fine. She intended to distribute the info.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the idea of a group lawsuit against her. Even if the only result is she stops foia-ing 10,000 times a month.

I’d lose my mind if I worked there. What a waste of taxpayer dollars answering request and request.

This is my issue.

FOIA laws are good laws. I believe in governmental transparency. I don't believe in FOIA abuse and fishing expeditions, which is what's been going on here. And I certainly don't believe in it when it targets my child.

+1

How can we stop the abuse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be a shame if someone doxxed her. Give her a taste of her own medicine.

How do you dox someone who is already public? She posts everything under her own name. We know who she is.

Doxxing includes posting someone’s address/phone number. She’s ok with someone on DCUM post that info?

[Anonymous]

I’m appalled and speechless. To the parents affected, is there a personal group to further discuss this and future actions taken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be a shame if someone doxxed her. Give her a taste of her own medicine.

How do you dox someone who is already public? She posts everything under her own name. We know who she is.

Doxxing includes posting someone’s address/phone number. She’s ok with someone on DCUM post that info?

You mean posting here publicly available information? Still not doxxing, everyone knows her name and can google.

Probably a good way to get yourself banned from this site tho.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This woman is on this thread trying to justify what she did based on the actions of FCPS. Apples and oranges my dear. What FCPS did is akin to manslaughter. What you did is akin to murder. I MIGHT be able to forgive manslaughter. Murder? Never.

You win the Internet for the stupidest analogy ever. Congrats!!!!

NP, the analogy isn't perfect but it isn't -that- bad either. Basically manslaughter is killing with some degree of negligence but not intent, murder is killing with intent. Replace "killing" with "disclosing sensitive data" and the analogy regarding intent basically holds, the only difference being Callie redacted some of the PII in her disclosure (as I understand it). That's an important distinction if the redaction was done properly and thoroughly and why the analogy isn't perfect, but the intentional vs. non-intentional distinction the PP was focusing their analogy on is also really important.

No. It’s terrible. Comparing what she did to murder?

You don't know how analogies work, do you?

Here is a refresher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

The fact that you cited Wikipedia for this instead of a credible source speaks volumes about you, Callie.

I was replying to the person who didn't seem to understand how analogies work (I thought it was a fine analogy).

It was a terrible analogy. As a PSA, don’t use it again. If you repeat it outside of anonymity, people will mock you when you walk away and laugh at you. On second hand, keep using it.

You don't understand analogies--the point was about the difference in severity depending on intentionality--which it illustrated just fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of taking advice of this self-acclaimed law expert who wants to dissuade everyone from filing suit against Oettinger, I think parents with a data breach should call a real lawyer with a specialty in privacy/digital privacy and ask if there are grounds. If there's grounds, there's probably someone willing to take this on.

I personally have no interest in suing FCPS--that's like shooting your own taxpaying foot IMO. But others may differ.

And a real lawyer will gladly take your money. But no lawyer will take this on a contingency because it’s a loser.

We'll see--I could see a lawyer willing to figure out ways to advocate and represent for 35,000 often affluent families in Fairfax just for the general good will and reputation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be a shame if someone doxxed her. Give her a taste of her own medicine.

How do you dox someone who is already public? She posts everything under her own name. We know who she is.

Doxxing includes posting someone’s address/phone number. She’s ok with someone on DCUM post that info?

You mean posting here publicly available information? Still not doxxing, everyone knows her name and can google.

Probably a good way to get yourself banned from this site tho.

Yes, even if it’s publicly available.

[Anonymous]

And a lawsuit would cause Callie to have to spend money and time defending herself. Works for me. She wastes taxpayer money with her constant attacks on FCPS and she should get some of what she gives.