Is his infringement an Internet possibility?
Or are some people just too sensitive and immature.
Interestingly....Why do minor's not require parental supervision on what is a site that will inevitably include adult comment?
Mr Ethan's gone again....What did I miss?
Posts
Total:
16
-->
@zedvictor4
As indicated in the ban log:
ethang5 has been banned for 90 days, following a resumed pattern of sexual harassment and disregarding both moderation intervention and polite requests from the target to cease.
So sexual harassment, but nothing about that implies targeting minors.
He unwarrantedly began accusing another member of trying to jack off onto him... This was not some isolated incident. He has chosen to outright declare people rejecting his sexual advances "is of no interest to me."
-->
@Barney
I have read the post you linked, I think that maybe I am missing some context here because if I'm not and that's the post he got banned for... I don't think you know how serious of an accusation 'sexual harassment' is.
I also understand if the more in-depth stuff is either deleted or happened on PMs with other members but if that post is what you are citing as evidence, I don't think the term you're using fits what he did (what he did is far less severe). That person 'Homer' is who? Is that the name of a member? I am confused.
-->
@RationalMadman
As mentioned, this was not an isolated incident. The post in question was a clear public resumption of his previous intolerable habit of sexually harassing people.
The target this time was Stephen, whom Ethang calls Homer. Annoying nicknames are not in themselves a CoC violation, but as you probably guessed, it does make moderation more painful.
there needs to be a restraining order with those two...
-->
@Barney
There's name calling and goading, and there's sexual harassment.....Two completely different issues.....I would suggest that it is inadvisable to accuse someone of sexual harassment without proper cause.
Stephen knows that his posts will goad Mr Ethan, and we have come to expect an acerbic response from Mr Ethan.
And the "minors" issue I raised was somewhat overlooked......What is the debateart position with regard to this?...And what are the statutory requirements with regard to minors, when providing an online service that allows direct contact between minors and unrelated adults?
-->
@zedvictor4
I would suggest that it is inadvisable to accuse someone of sexual harassment without proper cause.
Thank you for the advice, but this isn't a borderline case.
Stephen knows that his posts will goad
And Stephen also gets banned when he pushes it too far.
And the "minors" issue I raised was somewhat overlooked......What is the debateart position with regard to this?
To my knowledge, Ethang has not targeted any minors. I find his behavior reprehensible, but I'm not going to demonize him more than his chosen actions warrant.
As for minors using the site in general, if you think it would benefit anyone, we can probably add specific rules about parental supervision. Right now we limit the type of content which may be posted, and require users to be of age for local laws to use this kind of website.
-->
@Barney
So what constitutes a minor in these circumstances?
And how do you know the actual age of debateart contributors?
-->
@zedvictor4
I consider minors to be anyone under the age of 18.
And I have no way to verify anyone's actual age. As a moderator I just take them at their word.
-->
@Barney
Let's hypothesise and ask, if Mr Ethan were to sue debateart and it's moderators for defamation of character. (British Law, not sure of the U.S. equivalent) Claiming that they had been wrongfully been accused of sexual harassment.....How would the above casual regard to site management help in your defence?
-->
@zedvictor4
I'd pull out a more quotes of his unwelcome sexual advances. His bizarre responses to people asking him to cease and desist are easier to find, but I would expect those alone to get him laughed out of court.
Similarly Willows might try to sue for being accused of multi-accounting when all he did was create 20 or 30 multi-accounts, as if creating multi-accounts can't be confused with multi-accounting.
-->
@Barney
Multi accounting is an internal affair.
And "sexual advances" in a remote context, is itself a laughable concept.
The distinction between actual sexual intentions and goading based upon innuendo is pretty distinct.
-->
@zedvictor4
I'm getting curious as to what narrow definition of sexual harassment you use?
To list a few common ones to make it easy for you:
- "uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature..." Merriam-Webster
- "unwanted or offensive sexual attention, suggestions, or talk..." -Cambridge
- "behavior characterized by the making of unwelcome and inappropriate sexual remarks or physical advances in a workplace or other professional or social situation." -Oxford
And "sexual advances" in a remote context, is itself a laughable concept.
This is the information age, more and more interactions happen remotely. According to the Pew Research Center: "nearly one-in-five Americans (18%) have been subjected to particularly severe forms of harassment online, such as physical threats, harassment over a sustained period, sexual harassment or stalking."
That you personally find it laughable, doesn't mean it doesn't happen, or that the victims are not affected.
8 days later
-->
@Barney
Was he asked to stop before he was banned?
-->
@Username
Yes. "...disregarding both moderation intervention and polite requests from the target to cease."