Karma System.

[enwiabe]

I have no concerns about you using emails for administrative tasks, but you cannot compare that to using it for curiosity.

This argument is worrying:

If you feel that's a violation of rights, also consider that melanie.dee said that nobody would ever find out her name, effectively laying down the challenge and partially bringing that upon herself.

An analogy is that some woman who teased a man by saying "you'll never have sex with me" has effectively laid down the challenge and partially brought rape upon herself. The point is, melanie.dee has been clearly defensive of her personal details, and you have violated that without consent.

Eh, I'm not going to deny that it was primarily curiosity, but that's why I use e-mails for administrative purposes as well. I'm curious to know whether the people on FSN are people I want here. And, it was under the same principle of curiosity that I looked up melanie.dee's facebook. I proceeded no further, and never communicated any such details to anybody else. I have not broken the code of conduct and this is a moot point.

Re: the 'brought it on her self point. Yes, that is a weak point, analogous to the 'rape' argument, however, the ramifications of looking up a facebook are in no way comparable to that of rape, and so the analogy falls down here. Once you sign up to any forum, you surrender your e-mail to it, and depending on the forum's code of conduct, you take responsibility for what happens in terms of your information. The code of conduct clearly stipulates the prevention of the revealing of private information in a public domain, but nothing about the use of the e-mail by administrators. I think, to clear up any future confusion, I shall add in a clause to the Terms of Service saying that you surrender your e-mail and any information entered into the profile field to the administrator for sole use in the running of FSN. I'll also put in something about not supplying it to third party companies etc. as well.

[Fitness]

If you feel that's a violation of rights, also consider that melanie.dee said that nobody would ever find out her name, effectively laying down the challenge and partially bringing that upon herself.

That is so fucking childish.
How can you use this as an excuse. The world doesn't work like that. If you use that if you were to get into shit with the police  :police: you would be lol't at very hard.

That I entered that one e-mail into a facebook search to identify someone who was playing funny buggars

Funny buggars? That is so gay.
I hope you don't take the word "gay" the wrong way, after all I am just "playing funny buggars"

[melanie.dee]

Regardnless of whether or not it teechnically abuses your little code of conduct, it's pretty clear that using admin privilege to look someone up on facebook who expressely stated that they wanted to remain anonymous is morally way out of line, especially considering that facebook reveals full name, photo, possibly school and friends details etc etc.

Claiming that I brought it upon myself is ridiculous. I never issued a "challenge" to you to search for my personal details, you just decided you would infringe upon my privacy and do so, and an incorrect interpretation of the situation on your behalf doesn't excuse the breach of trust and privacy. Coblin's rape analogy sums it up nicely.

And indeed, despite whether it's technically an infringement of the code of conduct, it's certainly likely to strike a chord with other members equally concerned about protecting their privacy, who will also take issue with the nature of your actions. I suppose it's up to them to decide whether they should place their trust in an admin with little to no professionalism, who happily steps over the line to satisfy his own curiosity.

[brendan]

it's pretty clear that using admin privilege to look someone up on facebook who expressely stated that they wanted to remain anonymous is morally way out of line, especially considering that facebook reveals full name, photo, possibly school and friends details etc etc.

In questioning, mdee concended that her full name and email was not posted publicly by enwiabe.

that facebook reveals full name, photo, possibly school and friends details etc etc.

This is all information you agreed to submit to Facebook and you agreed to Facebook's terms and conditions by utilizing their services. 

[enwiabe]

I'm not going to defend myself morally, here. If it's bugging you that much, then I'll put it in an edited version of the Terms of Service. If you no longer agree to these terms of service, then you may delete your account.

In my defense for this, I have stopped accounts in the past who would have caused trouble for FSN by performing background checks. If you're going to sign up under a fake alias and be deliberately shady about who you are, then considering that there are people in this world who would seek to try to harm FSN, then a background check will be performed regardless. The only reason I hadn't done one before on you was because I didn't believe that you were one such person. If you believe i've stepped out of line morally, then good for you. I'm sure you're a saint. I don't think I've done anything wrong here, and to be honest with you, this method of running things has been how we've been able to identify a significant proportion of spambots in the past and other wrongdoers as well.

I refuse to apologise for this method of running things simply because it works. You surrendered your e-mail to FSN when you signed up. If you believe that is a mistake, you may delete your account. I have not stored it and I do not remember it, and I only recall your real first name as well. Go for gold, melanie.dee.

[Collin Li]

Brendan, it was not a breach of privacy, and I am not going to deny that (don't know about mdee).

My motivation for the exposure of this is to highlight the nature of his actions: finding out her name and then taunting her with the knowledge. It is not a breach of privacy, it does not break the "Code of Conduct" (that enwiabe writes, anyway), but it is to invite individuals to make their own judgement about this administrator.

My personal view on the issue is that it is unprofessional, and his blatant display of power is not attractive to anyone.

[Collin Li]

If you have problems with enwiabe's role on this site then just quit? Crying in this thread won't change anything. God

Nah. Boycotting is only one option. Making yourself heard, and trying to appeal to enwiabe's sense to change his ways, particularly his blatant display of power, is a much more constructive result (doesn't require the deconstruction of FSN, and the advocation of a new forum).

[enwiabe]

Okay, I will admit that it was unprofessional to state publically that I knew it. That was, I believe, an error in judgment and I apologise for that. However, my actions were not morally reprehensible. Melanie.dee has only blown an already dead and forgotten saga out of proportion and in fact magnified the 'mystery' surrounding her identity by bringing it out here instead of doing this through a private channel, with perhaps coblin to mediate. Because she's brought this out in a public forum, well, that's as poor judgment as I've ever exercised. Does that make her a bad or immoral person? No. And a little misjudgment on my part does not make me one either.

I realise now exactly what my folly was, and I am sorry for that and promise not to do it again.

[Fitness]

If you have problems with enwiabe's role on this site then just quit?

I like this community. I don't want to have to quit because of the one who runs the show.

That would be like leaving the country if you hate Kevin Rudd.

[enwiabe]

If you don't watch yourself and your homophobic comments, you may be leaving anyway.

[brendan]

infringe upon my privacy and do so, and an incorrect interpretation of the situation on your behalf doesn't excuse the breach of trust and privacy. Coblin's rape analogy sums it up nicely.

it was not a breach of privacy,

I would concur with Colin.

[Fitness]

If you don't watch yourself and your homophobic comments, you may be leaving anyway.

Not homophobic. Careful with the terminology there bro.

[enwiabe]

I refer, not to your comment in this thread, but in chat. And, like I said, if you continue to test rule 5) I.E. trolling, make no mistake, I will not hesitate in enforcing it.

[melanie.dee]

Hey it wasn't even me who brought this up, nor did I want to bring it up, I made it fairly clear how I felt about it the other day. I only responded to this thread after the issue was brought up, and I figured I should confirm it and clarify my thoughts on it. Either way I agree to some extent that this is making it worse and to be honest I'd rather not have commented on this issue on here at all, but at least it does allow people to make their own judgement based on your actions, and will hopefully inspire a little more professionalism in your future behaviour.

And Brendan, I formally retract any incorrect wording that you have taken issue with, I'm so genuinely sorry to have caused pain to your law-studying brain and hope you find it within your power to forgive me for my less than rigorous control of the english language and slight slip-ups that you seem so intent to highlight.

[Fitness]

I refer, not to your comment in this thread, but in chat. And, like I said, if you continue to test rule 5) I.E. trolling, make no mistake, I will not hesitate in enforcing it.

I said gay. So what? I poorly judged the effect it would have toward you.
And we all make poor judgments at times don't we?