Do not post messages with credit card numbers, calling card numbers, passwords to private computer systems, other user's real names and personal info (including pictures), or unsolicited phone numbers.

So someone recently asked me a few questions about what constitutes personal information on the forums. In some of the instances he described, I had some difficulty deciding whether or not it would be a violation of personal information being shared. Because I had difficulty deciding, I figured that I wasn't alone. So I'm going to shed some light on the gray areas and we'll decide once and for all what is and isn't a violation. The following is a list of factors that go into my decision when dealing with a possible personal info violation. In some of them I posted what I would do in such an instance. If you do something different, please quote me and tell us how you would handle the situation. There are no wrong answers, I'm just trying to figure out what page everyone is on before we start turning pages. Ya know? And if you think there's a situation or factor that I did not cover, please post here!

For the following I'm going to call the victim XYZ and the offender ABC.

The vitality of the info: I would usually say that posting just a first name is not a bannable offense. Certainly something you should edit out (should XYZ request it) and you should probably give ABC some sort of warning about it if it didn't look malicious.

The parrot effect: Someone releases personal info into a thread. The user is not well liked on the boards by a substantial number of people. These people all take it upon themselves to spread the info as well. My general rule of thumb is that if they do it within the original thread, only the original poster should be punished (unless they repost it after it's been removed from the original post). If they spawn their own thread or invade other threads to share the info, they should be punished as well.

Intent of the poster: If ABC did it with the intent of releasing the user's info (ie: ABC was trying to spread XYZ's name) then he should be infracted and/or banned. Any malicious attempt (regardless of how minor the personal info) should not go unnoticed or unpunished.

Compounded personal info: I'll use myself in this example. I don't mind sharing my first name with people. I also tell people the general area that I live in (central ohio). But if someone were to tell totse what university I went to, I would be very angry. Anyone who had read my other posts would be able to figure out who I am in real life with relative ease now. With ONLY the knowledge of what school I go to, you would have a 1 in 4000 shot or so (not quite a bannable offence since you can't identify me in real life by what school I go to). With the knowledge of my first name however, you've got a 1 in 3 shot at figuring out who I am.
-This one I'm still not sure what to do with. Technically I should not be giving out any info if I don't want to be identified in real life. But at the same time, I was very careful of what info I did release - someone else fucked it up for me.

Common knowledge: XYZ posts his own full name in a thread. Months later, ABC starts calling ABC by his full name in all of his threads (his intent is to spread ABC's name). In this situation I would have to say that it's just XYZ's fault. Regardless of how burried he thought the thread was, it's his fault for posting it in the first place.

Mistrusted friend: I've seen this happen MANY times. ABC befriends XYZ on the boards and eventually on some sort of chat medium (AIM, IRC, MSN, or one of those). ABC gets XYZ to send him pictures of himself. ABC posts the said pictures on the BBS. - For this I'd say that ABC just needs to be punished. That's a clear violation because the pictures were never posted on the BBS or on the photo gallery. If they were, it would be free game.

With ONLY the knowledge of what school I go to, you would have a 1 in 4000 shot or so (not quite a bannable offence since you can't identify me in real life by what school I go to)..

I'd just look for the guy with the hideous yellow shoes


Good post.

I'd just look for the guy with the hideous yellow shoes


Good post.

Ahahaha, agreed :D

They are pretty ugly to be fair :P

Stay on topic.

Stay on topic.

Heh, sorry Zok.

Anyway...

I think that posting any part of any name without full permission is something to act upon.

You can do a lot with a name, even if it's only partial.

As for 'The Parrot Effect', I think all parties spreading the information should be punished...If someone posts information by accident, and then edits their post only to find several quotes.

Then it's beyond the original posters control.

And even if it's in the same thread, the new posters of this information are still duplicating it. (Sorry if a lot of that doesn't make sense, I'm running on 2 hours sleep).

'Intent of the Poster' seems pretty spot on; as does '
Compounded personal info', 'Common knowledge' and 'Mistrusted friend'.

So first name isn't allowed if the person whose name is being said doesn't want it out there?

There was an incident recently in MP(mandatory deleted the name at the request of the poster), so I'm wonder if that's how it should be handled?

I feel if someone divulges anything about another poster with deffinate malicious intent on the forums they should be punished, and if other people then parrot that person I think they should be punished also, if their intent is also to be spitefull and cause trouble.

I'm a bit confused on one topic though. If a girl (not underage) posts naked pics of herself, willingly, on totse, and then changes her mind and wants them gone, what do we do to people who post them everywhere?
If the girl allowed them to be let out in the first place I'm not sure if we can punish someone for sharing what is technically now public property?

I'm a bit confused on one topic though. If a girl (not underage) posts naked pics of herself, willingly, on totse, and then changes her mind and wants them gone, what do we do to people who post them everywhere?
If the girl allowed them to be let out in the first place I'm not sure if we can punish someone for sharing what is technically now public property?

I think that situation is covered by this part of Zok's post:

Mistrusted friend: I've seen this happen MANY times. ABC befriends XYZ on the boards and eventually on some sort of chat medium (AIM, IRC, MSN, or one of those). ABC gets XYZ to send him pictures of himself. ABC posts the said pictures on the BBS. - For this I'd say that ABC just needs to be punished. That's a clear violation because the pictures were never posted on the BBS or on the photo gallery. If they were, it would be free game.

Now - and this may be covered by that same section - what about someone who had posted a pic in the gallery, then someone changes it a little - or a lot - in photoshop and then the user asks that the picture be removed from the gallery and has posted more than once that they do not wish their picture to be posted any longer? The example I have in mind, oddly enough, is the pic I had in the gallery that was changed into the now infamous 'Brownfinger' picture.

The other - and more important - question for me has to do with the wording of the infraction itself. Specifically:

...other user's real names and personal info (including pictures), or unsolicited phone numbers.

The part I'm wondering about is "user's". What about people posting such information of someone who isn't a Totse member? Because I see people posting, say, the myspace of someone they know and don't like, with the intention of people messing with them. Do we offer the same protection to people who are not Totse members, or are they 'fair game', for lack of better term?

And, lastly, I will usually at least edit out any personal info, even if the person says it is their own, since there's not really any way to know for sure if it is their own info. But in such cases I rarely infract for it; just edit out the offending material.

What about people posting such information of someone who isn't a Totse member?

You can refer to the thread about posting revenge pictures here.

Although there is a difference that should be pointed out.

In the case of naked pictures (some possibly underage), in my opinion they should be dealt with harshly.

If a Totsean posts address/phone number type details of a non-member, then once again, I think they should be dealt with harshly.

But if someone is talking about a non-member and, for example, uses their real name, then I don't see anything that should be done.

Zok makes an excellent point and I have to agree with the situational advice.

It is highly subjective and intent is quite important.

I also forgot to mention that I usually edit out ALL IP addresses, street addresses, and phone numbers. Even if the user says that it's their own info, there's still no way to verify. It's always possible that they're soliciting someone else's number in an attempt to piss that person off.

I don't really plan on this, but I figure the more we know, so hypothetically speaking... if a user was to take a picture off the photo gallery where the user whose picture was taken then starts to complain, how should this be handled? Just a warning to both?

I'm pretty much in complete agreement, although if somebody's posted something like pictures on the boards before and they then regret it, I'd remove it on request even though it would be their own fault in the first place.

First names are almost impossible to police. Recently I removed mention of a user's first name from SG a few times when he said he didn't want it posted (I didn't infract anybody, I posted a message asking people to have a little courtesy and it actually worked). I'd have been hesitant to infract even if they carried on, though, first names aren't much to worry about. I'll remove them if asked, that's all, but wouldn't infract even if it was malicious unless they did it repeatedly after being warned.

I've only ever given out a couple of personal information infractions. When I've had to deal with it I've edited it out and warned both the user and other users that anybody posting it will be banned. If I mention that we have a six-month ban it's usually pretty damn effective. It's not like people can complain if they do it again and get banned.

Apart from that I'd do exactly the same as Zok. I'd warn and then ban somebody for posting what you called compounded personal information and edit it out, it's still personal information and the situation makes it more urgent to deal with. And like Euda said, it's all down to the situation.