So, is it ok to say absolutely anything if you use a :)

Post by **Xest** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:32 pm

[quote="clearbrook"]Most of the catching has been when the feds get hold of the credit card details from real sites. I think it is more than a little bit nasty to pay people to abuse children myself.

On the subject of anonymity, I must admit that in my more paranoid moments I tend to wonder how many of the "anonymising" servers are really located inside CIA headquarters ]
The case with the credit card details was only one high profile case because it was an international effort. In the UK, our police force makes most of it's arrests as a result of honey traps. Once the police have evidence of paedophiles downloading images from these honey traps and hence log their IP addresses they're in a perfect position to demand from the ISP the details of the person who had that IP address.

Post by **Lieva** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:34 pm

Cyfr wrote:I wondered why you were trying to chat me up in a manly voice on msn..

cuz i know you prefer guys hun

Post by **Lieva** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:36 pm

Xest wrote:How would you define the two online?

hmm

well perhaps there would be special cases.
Such as complete info online would mean anyone has access to a celebratys real home addy etc and email.
Obviously that should be kept secret simply cuz of the weirdos out there.
I imagine it wouldnt be FULL anonymity - just partial peon anonymity

Kallima · Post by **Kallima** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:37 pm

clearbrook wrote:Most of the catching has been when the feds get hold of the credit card details from real sites. I think it is more than a little bit nasty to pay people to abuse children myself.

I agree heartily. It fuels an industry based on abuse, and that is not harmless.

Post by **Xest** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:46 pm

I'm not saying that difference is good or bad, but it does make a difference.

I'm still not entirely sure what relevance this difference has to this particular discussion though.

If you were posting on the US forum for the server you play there, then things like wanting to go on someone's raids in future might consciously or unconsciously affect how you post about them.

That's generally the idea behind having a 3rd party who can treat people based on how they act on the forums and not depending on in game motives - I don't have this personal connection with players but I do know enough to know what's going on in terms of how in game things may cause tempers to flare temporarily and cause people to act differently to usual however. I can't moderate depending on what I want to acheive in game, only based on how people act on the forums I'm moderating.

Heta · Post by **Heta** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:50 pm

I really think people should be less tense, relaxe a bit guys

Post by **Xest** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:55 pm

Heta wrote:I really think people should be less tense, relaxe a bit guys

It's cos you left me by myself over Christmas.

P.S. RR5 by tommorrow, just think, your cabby could've been there too!

Norcott · Post by **Norcott** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:55 pm

Heta wrote:I really think people should be less tense, relaxe a bit guys

I agree with this 100%.. people should relax and see the funnier side of things first.. try and see the sarcasm and humour rather than an aggressive approach.. or at least do ya self justice and get a laff out of ur reply..

or is that just me.. lol

Kallima · Post by **Kallima** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:03 pm

Xest wrote:I'm still not entirely sure what relevance this difference has to this particular discussion though.

As I said, it was really that I felt some of the things you said were really forum focussed rather than game focussed. Perhaps I could equally well have commented you were replying as a mod rather than a player. When you say things like tough, someone is rude, there is no come back or penalty. On a forum there isn't unless the person running the forum decides someone is so destructive they don't want them there. In game there are come backs. A lot of people keep their head down, don't challenge your behaviour, but put you on their mental list of people to avoid. I have seen people behave in a way that meant hardly anyone would group with them. Unfair to name a specific example, though one is glowing in my mind. I was actually one of the very few people in game who would invite him to an rvr group, because I recognised his behaviour was frustration rather than an enjoyment of being nasty to people. I was happy to have him in group if he behaved, and he made the effort and did.

Kallima · Post by **Kallima** » Wed Jan 04, 2006 1:07 pm

Heta wrote:I really think people should be less tense, relaxe a bit guys

I'm not tense. In fact I won't continue in a discussion if I'm up tight about it. I will happily debate things like Margaret Thatcher where I personally don't care at all. <grins>

In fact, to be quite honest, I'm only posting on the forum because the systems I support are deathly quiet, I've got a cold so don't feel like doing much real life stuff, and there is nothing I'm especially trying to do in game at the moment. So I'm roleplaying a board bunny. <giggles>