Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between what is possible, and what is shitty to do.

Sure you have the ability to broadcast a private or semi-private email message to a much larger audience, but all things being equal it's generally a shitty thing to do.

If the only response you have is "that's naive" then you sound like a huge douchebag.

\

What makes you think an email to a LIST of people is private or even semi-private? And how is it douchebaggery to point out to you and those who think like you that you are being naive if you expect privacy on PUBLIC internet lists??

The fact is that there is a huge difference between things are technically public but not accessible to a lot of people, and things that have been broadcast to the world.

For example, the way I look when I go out in public is obviously public information, but if you take a picture of me and post on it a popular internet site with a caption that mocks me, I will think you are a douchebag.

understood but an imperfect analogy ... in your example, you're not effectively saying "look at me, listen to me!". But when you post publicly on a listserve, you are. The distinction matters IMO, though it may not to your reaction.

I don't think that's relevant for purposes of this discussion, since the argument was simply that any expectation of privacy in the internet age is naive. I think that is what kids are being raised to believe, but I think that sucks (if you want an imperfect analogy, I'd say it's like raising kids to believe social security is going bankrupt, because that way when the right wingers get around to gutting it they won't complain).

Shorter answer-- if I post on a listserv I expect to take crap from anyone on that listserv. I don't expect to take crap from everyone who reads DCUM/jezebel/reddit etc.

Other people are not responsible for your ill-thought out expectations of possible outcomes.
When you hit send, it's out of your hands.

You are right, sadly. But what you are saying is that none of us is responsible for thinking about anyone else's feelings. Your statement is totally lacking in ethics. But you are right, so pat yourself on the back, and go back to trashing people anonymously.

People who don't think about anyone else's feelings (pine cone mom), are kind of low on the list when it comes to asking for others to respect their personal feelings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between what is possible, and what is shitty to do.

Sure you have the ability to broadcast a private or semi-private email message to a much larger audience, but all things being equal it's generally a shitty thing to do.

If the only response you have is "that's naive" then you sound like a huge douchebag.

\

What makes you think an email to a LIST of people is private or even semi-private? And how is it douchebaggery to point out to you and those who think like you that you are being naive if you expect privacy on PUBLIC internet lists??

The fact is that there is a huge difference between things are technically public but not accessible to a lot of people, and things that have been broadcast to the world.

For example, the way I look when I go out in public is obviously public information, but if you take a picture of me and post on it a popular internet site with a caption that mocks me, I will think you are a douchebag.

understood but an imperfect analogy ... in your example, you're not effectively saying "look at me, listen to me!". But when you post publicly on a listserve, you are. The distinction matters IMO, though it may not to your reaction.

I don't think that's relevant for purposes of this discussion, since the argument was simply that any expectation of privacy in the internet age is naive. I think that is what kids are being raised to believe, but I think that sucks (if you want an imperfect analogy, I'd say it's like raising kids to believe social security is going bankrupt, because that way when the right wingers get around to gutting it they won't complain).

Shorter answer-- if I post on a listserv I expect to take crap from anyone on that listserv. I don't expect to take crap from everyone who reads DCUM/jezebel/reddit etc.

Other people are not responsible for your ill-thought out expectations of possible outcomes.
When you hit send, it's out of your hands.

You are right, sadly. But what you are saying is that none of us is responsible for thinking about anyone else's feelings. Your statement is totally lacking in ethics. But you are right, so pat yourself on the back, and go back to trashing people anonymously.

Which is what you just did, unless your name is "Anonymous"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between what is possible, and what is shitty to do.

Sure you have the ability to broadcast a private or semi-private email message to a much larger audience, but all things being equal it's generally a shitty thing to do.

If the only response you have is "that's naive" then you sound like a huge douchebag.

\

What makes you think an email to a LIST of people is private or even semi-private? And how is it douchebaggery to point out to you and those who think like you that you are being naive if you expect privacy on PUBLIC internet lists??

The fact is that there is a huge difference between things are technically public but not accessible to a lot of people, and things that have been broadcast to the world.

For example, the way I look when I go out in public is obviously public information, but if you take a picture of me and post on it a popular internet site with a caption that mocks me, I will think you are a douchebag.

understood but an imperfect analogy ... in your example, you're not effectively saying "look at me, listen to me!". But when you post publicly on a listserve, you are. The distinction matters IMO, though it may not to your reaction.

I don't think that's relevant for purposes of this discussion, since the argument was simply that any expectation of privacy in the internet age is naive. I think that is what kids are being raised to believe, but I think that sucks (if you want an imperfect analogy, I'd say it's like raising kids to believe social security is going bankrupt, because that way when the right wingers get around to gutting it they won't complain).

Shorter answer-- if I post on a listserv I expect to take crap from anyone on that listserv. I don't expect to take crap from everyone who reads DCUM/jezebel/reddit etc.

Other people are not responsible for your ill-thought out expectations of possible outcomes.
When you hit send, it's out of your hands.

You are right, sadly. But what you are saying is that none of us is responsible for thinking about anyone else's feelings. Your statement is totally lacking in ethics. But you are right, so pat yourself on the back, and go back to trashing people anonymously.

Anonymous wrote:Well, I get the sense that the author of that missive may in fact be participating in this thread or maybe even started.

If so, I hope this was a lesson well learned, not only about what can happen to content you put on the Internet, but also about resisting the urge to send missives like that in the first place to a bunch of people. A little self-reflection is probably in order.

I'm the OP of this thread, and I have no connection to the posting on the list serve. I don't know, you can take my word for it?!?

I'm just someone who would never re-post a message the way that person did. Clearly others think differently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between what is possible, and what is shitty to do.

Sure you have the ability to broadcast a private or semi-private email message to a much larger audience, but all things being equal it's generally a shitty thing to do.

If the only response you have is "that's naive" then you sound like a huge douchebag.

\

What makes you think an email to a LIST of people is private or even semi-private? And how is it douchebaggery to point out to you and those who think like you that you are being naive if you expect privacy on PUBLIC internet lists??

The fact is that there is a huge difference between things are technically public but not accessible to a lot of people, and things that have been broadcast to the world.

For example, the way I look when I go out in public is obviously public information, but if you take a picture of me and post on it a popular internet site with a caption that mocks me, I will think you are a douchebag.

understood but an imperfect analogy ... in your example, you're not effectively saying "look at me, listen to me!". But when you post publicly on a listserve, you are. The distinction matters IMO, though it may not to your reaction.

I don't think that's relevant for purposes of this discussion, since the argument was simply that any expectation of privacy in the internet age is naive. I think that is what kids are being raised to believe, but I think that sucks (if you want an imperfect analogy, I'd say it's like raising kids to believe social security is going bankrupt, because that way when the right wingers get around to gutting it they won't complain).

Shorter answer-- if I post on a listserv I expect to take crap from anyone on that listserv. I don't expect to take crap from everyone who reads DCUM/jezebel/reddit etc.

Other people are not responsible for your ill-thought out expectations of possible outcomes.

When you hit send, it's out of your hands.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between what is possible, and what is shitty to do.

Sure you have the ability to broadcast a private or semi-private email message to a much larger audience, but all things being equal it's generally a shitty thing to do.

If the only response you have is "that's naive" then you sound like a huge douchebag.

\

What makes you think an email to a LIST of people is private or even semi-private? And how is it douchebaggery to point out to you and those who think like you that you are being naive if you expect privacy on PUBLIC internet lists??

The fact is that there is a huge difference between things are technically public but not accessible to a lot of people, and things that have been broadcast to the world.

For example, the way I look when I go out in public is obviously public information, but if you take a picture of me and post on it a popular internet site with a caption that mocks me, I will think you are a douchebag.

understood but an imperfect analogy ... in your example, you're not effectively saying "look at me, listen to me!". But when you post publicly on a listserve, you are. The distinction matters IMO, though it may not to your reaction.

I don't think that's relevant for purposes of this discussion, since the argument was simply that any expectation of privacy in the internet age is naive. I think that is what kids are being raised to believe, but I think that sucks (if you want an imperfect analogy, I'd say it's like raising kids to believe social security is going bankrupt, because that way when the right wingers get around to gutting it they won't complain).

Shorter answer-- if I post on a listserv I expect to take crap from anyone on that listserv. I don't expect to take crap from everyone who reads DCUM/jezebel/reddit etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a difference between what is possible, and what is shitty to do.

Sure you have the ability to broadcast a private or semi-private email message to a much larger audience, but all things being equal it's generally a shitty thing to do.

If the only response you have is "that's naive" then you sound like a huge douchebag.

\

What makes you think an email to a LIST of people is private or even semi-private? And how is it douchebaggery to point out to you and those who think like you that you are being naive if you expect privacy on PUBLIC internet lists??

The fact is that there is a huge difference between things are technically public but not accessible to a lot of people, and things that have been broadcast to the world.

For example, the way I look when I go out in public is obviously public information, but if you take a picture of me and post on it a popular internet site with a caption that mocks me, I will think you are a douchebag.

Except that sending a rant to a listserv is not equivalent to quickly walking around in public. It's pulling up a crate on a corner with hundreds of people, then standing on it and publicly vocalizing your views. You've got to expect someone will take your picture then. And if someone does, would you really call them a douchebag?