Tell me: Is it crazy, or is it just... someone else?

[thebitterguy]

Now, hypothetically speaking, supose someone who was a member of a specific fan organization was surfing for discussion of a recent event, and saw that one of the organizers of that event was publically slamming the fan group.

Would this member of the fan group be out of line for letting their fellow members know it was being said, and asking them if they felt the disparaging remarks were justified or out of line?

Just, you know, hypothetically speaking.

Comments

[jesshartley.livejournal.com]

Public forums are public. If the organizer didn't want/expect the slamees to see it, (s)he'd have kept his comments private.

[thebitterguy]

That's in in the nutshell; publically posted commentary is for public consumption.

[anidada.livejournal.com]

I think I followed that...

Said in public = fair game.

[thebitterguy]

Thanks. I just wanted to make sure.

[athelind.livejournal.com]

I third that motion. It is ENTIRELY appropriate to pass that on to the other members of the group.

[thebitterguy]

Thanks for the confirmation. I was accused of havin' 'motivations'.

[momentrabbit.livejournal.com]

You'd be doing them a favour, ensuring their commentary achieve wider distribution. :)

[thebitterguy]

Exactly. It's helping.

[elizard100.livejournal.com]

I think I know what you 're talking about and all I have to say is that if someone says something publicly where anyone can and will see it, then they have to answer for what they said. I even think it's a good thing to encourage dialogue where obviously none is taking place and hopefully it will clear the air and promote better communication in the future.

Email me if you want to discuss this further.

[thebitterguy]

I'll drop you a line when I get home tonight.

[velvetpage.livejournal.com]

I agree - if the comments are public, they're fair game. If they're locked to a small group of people of whom the person who saw them is one, that's a very slightly different story - it would be betraying a trust, but still, if it's been said on the internet, it must be assumed that people are going to see it and spread it.

[thebitterguy]

Publically.

[neosis.livejournal.com]

I'd say no, but remember since you pointed it out, it's your duty to bring the rope to the lynching.

[thebitterguy]

Now, now, no one wants a lynching.

[noizangel.livejournal.com]

Hypothetically, I'd like a link. I just like to know what people are talking about. :D

[thebitterguy]

Hypothetically, they may have locked it after said hypothetical person might have forwarded the hypothetical quote and link to the equally hypothetical group.

[noizangel.livejournal.com]

Darn. My web surfing was all for naught!

[thebitterguy]

Just out of curiosity, where did you go to look?

[noizangel.livejournal.com]

I went poking around the Trolaris forums, because I figured that was the most recent event. I could have been poking in the wrong place, but hey. Why write a column when I can websurf instead?

[thebitterguy]

True. It was actually on an LJ. They privatized it, and apparently started stomping on a hypothetical person instead of admitting they might have possibly done something wrong.

[absinthe-dot-ca.livejournal.com]

Anything you post on the web in public is just that - PUBLIC. It's about time people realized what privacy does and does not mean. Do what you must, sir!

[thebitterguy]

I kind of already did. It was fun poking a big dumb doggy in his pointy head.

[crashing-angel.livejournal.com]

What were they slamming the group about in your theory?

[thebitterguy]

Ingratitude for the con getting a guest from their show because not enough of them showed up.

[crashing-angel.livejournal.com]

Then by all means, rip ass.

[styrofoam-guy.livejournal.com]

Is it possible the hypothetical posting was supposed to be locked but was accidentally made public? And if this was the case then there would be a followup hypothetical posting stating this.

[thebitterguy]

An interested set of new variables, but they wouldn't really affect the original question.

[browncoat2x2]

I have seen this sort of thing countless times in another broup I belong to.... Public LJ posts are just that, PUBLIC - ANYONE can read them, you don't even have to have an LJ account!!! If a person posts something to LJ that they Don't want certain people to read, that's what a friends lock post is for. Otherwise, it is out there for public consumption and they have no one to blame but themselves. thehypotheticalguy did nothing wrong.

[thebitterguy]

Exactly. Thanks for confirming that for me.