Your Real-Life Personal Information

I'll let you have the last word...it speaks volumes.

You know what? Problems like this are not solved on the forums. Problems like this are solved by:

1) Getting an attorney,
2) Filing an action for false light invasion of privacy and tort,
3) Serving LL with discovery to produce information regarding the whereabouts of Mr. Nolan,
4) Hauling his ass into court and showing him there is personal liability for deliberately malicious acts,
5) Blogging the entire process as a personal diary.

But hey, if you instead want to turn it into a means of earning popularity/sympathy on the forums, go for it.

As for you, Mr. Nolan -- count your lucky stars no one has decided to deal with your virtual bullying, but don't count on that lasting forever. Times, they are a changing -- if not within LL, in the world itself.

Prokofy writes for SLH. Prokofy has also stated that Prokofy writes and has ridiculed people for accepting sub-prokofy-standard pay for doing so. Shocker there.

The only person I answer to is Pathfinder or the other mods, not a bloodthirsty gang who just can't get over the fact that I revealed that "shocking" revelation. You can all nitpick like piranhas all nite, I am out of here. Go find someone else to feast on.

Well I think I was a damned poor show Nolan. Damned poor.

Yeah. Sue me for what armchair lawyer? Looking up public info on the web? I may have breeched LL's ToS, but you cannot apply any of those other RL legalities to this situation. They would laugh that right out of court. *Your honor, we are sueing Mr. Nash for divulging truthful, publically available information in an online game*. Calm down. You've just gone off the deep end.

I may be new but I would hope Pathfinder boots your ass. A piss ass warning, then you do it 2 more times that I have seen. Ya I think you should have been out at 1 but 3? Come on Pathfinder do something about this!

They are? Our government in this country has increased bullying folks to get their way about a hundred fold on the last few years. Corporations are finding new ways to bully both employees and opposition and bullies still thrive in our supposedly zero-tolerence school system. But I wish what you said was true...I really do..

What on earth would you do that for? Some of Prokofy's RL info was posted here and sourced from the internet. Posting the info here was in violation of the TOS and if there was any punishment to be handed down, it was to be decided by the Lindens.

What would you sue for?

He has. A warning was issued. It's a minor offence. Nolan knows that and has admitted his error and probably realizes to continue to do so would get him banned.

What more do you expect?

Lindens have far more serious issues afoot than Prokofy's frivolity.

You, sir, are a fool. Fortunately for you, you are a fool who chooses well when harrassing or stalking others. I would strongly advise you to educate yourself. You cannot always rely upon your victims being ignorant.

As for your opinions, sorry, you are quite irrelevent to me. I merely took a moment to point out the reality that, all things being equal, Prof would rather have popularity than vengeance and that you have obviously slipped a belt with regard to blurring the lines between gaming and the real world.

Feel free to carry on (as if you could stop?).

I have further reviewed this issue, and the matter is now a private one between the parties in question and LL. This is being further investigated and reviewed given the seriousness of privacy violations of any kind.

To further clarify: posting RL-identifying information about an individual is a serious violation of Privacy and will be carefully reviewed and dealt with very strongly. Information in someone's First Life profile may be shared publically, but nothing more.

It's our policy not to discuss the details of specific incidents, but I can assure you that privacy is one of our most important issues.

-Pathfinder

Frivolity? Breaking the TOS is not frivolous. Stalking, inWorld or out, is not frivolous. Threats of any kind are not frivolous. No matter who is involved.

Bad behavior should never be tolerated just because someone has deemed it "frivolous".

Labeling something "frivolous" does not make it so; just like labeling something an apology does not make it so; nor does labeling something "contrition" make it so. The truth is in behavior, not words. And no amount of spin-doctoring and word-smithing will make bad behavior any less bad.

I agree with others that the manner in which LL is treating this breach of the TOS sends a chilling message about similar circumstances in the future.

Not all the facts were in when I made my initial comments. I did what I did to immediately protect a resident's privacy, and have reviewed things further since that time.

To protect the privacy of the people involved, we can't comment any more on any specific incident. But believe me...privacy is not frivolous.

You don't know that I am a man! LIBEL!

It's really cute when the the internet lawyers puff their chest out and talk smack that they heard on Law and Order.


Tort: Any private or civil wrong by act of omission for which a civil suit can be brought, but not including breach of contract.

Invasion of Privacy: False light - False light invasion of privacy occurs when information is published about a person that is false or places the person in a false light, is highly offensive to a reasonable person, and is published with knowledge or in reckless disregard of whether the information was false or would place the person in a false light.

Sorry, you are WAY off base. I realize, especially when contrasted with your other *I am the authority on this subject* type posts on these forums, that you think you are wiser and more clever that the rest of us, however, this post of yours takes the cake for grandiloquence.

Have a nice evening, and don't forget to send that installment to your attorney.

Pathfinder, you rock, the FIC should have a party in your honor . I think most of the linden's jobs would be fun, but I don't think I want yours. You're doing great.

Maybe you need to review this part with the involved partie again, Pathfinder.

Agreed. It is not just messy, it is subjective. What is publicly shared by one may be considered private information by another. Even when information may be publicly available, such as a telephone number listed in the phone book, it is not acceptable to post that number here.

Personal privacy has to mean just that without subjective values assigned to the information.

Many of us can remember a nasty dispute aired on the forums between two members who began posting personal info about one another. They were suspended. Once again, regardless of the standard used by LL, we need evenhanded enforcement of the CS/TOS.

Mixed feelings about this. I couldn't fault you for declairing it private and holding a ban over the heads of all parties involved, but then again, this thread is going to happen if you try to leave the forums free and open.

Ingrid! Why are you coming at me out of left field? I would stand up just as much for your right to keep your private information private!

I haven't had months and months of reading these forums. I do, though, know how Prok goes on, and I know how passionately he can go on, from knowing him in TSO and from reading the SLH. I also know what a way with words he has, and how many of them he tends to use. We have had a number of conversations, enough to know that we disagree totally on several issues. He would be the first to tell you that. However, I respect his views and always find them interesting, even when I just don't agree, and I think he does mine. Most of the things he feels strongly about, I don't. It doesn't bother me. I have always found him to be a very nice and very helpful - if somewhat prickly and eccentric - person, in both TSO and now SL.

Where on earth do you get the notion that I come to SL from TSO with a chip on my shoulder? What chip? Where do you get this idea?

And what is this about my "negative experiences in SL?" What negative experiences? I have opinions on the game. Some of them are negative. Some of them are highly positive. That the latter outweigh the former is pretty much proved by the fact that this is the game I play the most now.

But I have had no such "negative experiences." What could you possibly be talking about? And how can you decide this for me? I critique things, both positively and negatively, just as I did when I played TSO. Because I am a thinking person. Just as I would critique a movie, with the difference being that in an ongoing, evolving online game, you do have some hopes of eventually changing things for the better, whereas a movie is a done deal.

Perhaps you equate critiqueing things and stating opinions as "being negative." What negative? Posts I wrote about how hard it is to be a new player? About how I thought the game should have more built-in goals, or the players themselves should provide more of them, like the gnome factory? Have you not read my posts raving about the wonderfulness of the Meins Residential Community, where I live? Have you not read the several places where I talked about how much fun it is to attend Captions? Have you not read that I enjoy playing Bingo? Or have you just read my criticisms about how it is to be a new player in the game, with no direction or goal and no means to earn money? Have you not also read how much more I appreciate being able to build things for free, like you weren't able to before, than I would want back anything else that came before my time, such as lifetime memberships, events subsidies, and easy ratings?

Or are you equating me with Prok? I refuse to be equated with Prok. Yet, I will stand up for a person or a principle regardless of whether anyone equates me with the other people involved. This goes for standing up for you and Nolan and ANYBODY when it is a principle involved. Or are things here always about personalities and who's friends with who, rather than about ideas? I'm not going to avoid people because of others' opinions of them; or shy away from standing up for what I feel is right; you can do what you wish to me. I'm not going to not speak up in bullying cases, either.

Whatever it is, why ever you are saying these things, I am sideswiped by this and very surprised and somewhat hurt. I would like to say in my own defense that I am by no means a negative person, and I most DEFINITELY DO NOT arrive at this game with ANY KIND of a chip on my shoulder. What an idea. I have more or less left (i.e., play very little), my last game, TSO, in order to play this one. I played the last one for two years, made many lasting friends, provided an entire year's worth of Game Show Channel for the entertainment of the other players, and enjoyed building my homes there.

Here I am enjoying living in Meins, playing Bingo, making new friends, and learning how to build things. I am heavy into making things, as a matter of fact.

I haven't been around here long enough to know whose toes I'm stepping on when I say what. So if I inadvertently stepped on yours, I'm sorry. But I do recognize bullying situations when I see them (Catherine, regarding nude avatars), and I do recognize serious and dangerous infractions of the privacy clause of the TOS, and I WILL COMMENT ON BOTH. As to this one, I don't think it is a laughing matter whatsoever. I once had a crazy stalker in TSO, and though I don't think this situation here is dangerous at all, the issue is serious because they CAN be dangerous situations. And it's against the rules.

I do think that Nolan has, as he said, learned not to do this, and I don't think he is going to do so in the future. I really think he just didn't know the gravity of these things (may not still), and, if nothing else, Prokofy starting the thread about the issue (the ISSUE, mind you; I didn't know it was about Nolan until Nolan outed himself, whoever the heck Nolan is) and others chiming in has clarified for many that posting private information is not something you do at all, ever. I don't think Pathfinder was stern enough about it.

I would defend this for anyone, whether they are my friend from another game, like Prok or you, Ingrid (I THOUGHT), or not. But I will also defend myself here, by clarifying that I do not have "negative experiences" in this game or any of my others (otherwise I wouldn't play them); I do not have a negative attitude; I did not by any means come into this game with Prok or at any time near when he did (I came to be with other friends, like Shaggy, and out of boredom with TSO); and I definitely don't complain for the sake of complaining. You can't easily dismiss my views and ideas by trying to portray me in this negative light.

I criticize things that I see as wrong (and this I saw as VERY VERY wrong), as well as make suggestions for improvements. If that's considered "complaining," then I guess there is no need to speak up in a forum at all or talk about the game at all. Anyone who knows me in my games knows I am a positive person (although I might get down about a particular game situation sometimes). I don't need to "try being positive" and suddenly realize it "works wonders," thank you very much, INGRID.

coco

Edited to add: I have now read Pathfinder's further comments on the situation, and I am convinced that LL does take this issue more seriously than appeared in his first post, and that they will treat it seriously and appropriately, whether or not either party agrees with their final take on it.

I thought you were quitting...get on with it already

You are half right, Nolan. However, when you breach LL's TOS, you also breach an implied agreement with all other members. Yes, you have an agreement even with Prok, because you agreed to the same TOS he/she/it did, and you KNOW that, and both parties have a reasonable expectation of privacy, and you know THAT too. So there is "standing" -- a member COULD sue you and not have the suit thrown out. That's the half where you are wrong.

There is the issue of "damages", however. It is not enough to show that you did something "wrong" -- they have to also show that they were actually harmed financially in order to "win" anything. So you are right on that half.

If your "victim" argues that all the hard work they've done in SL is wasted because their "business" wouldn't work if their real identity were known, and its YOUR fault that their identity became known, then there actually could be a case there.

Lawyers are imaginative, so anything can happen.

Buster

Let's try to avoid personal attacks in this thread, please.

There are important general issues of privacy discussed here, and I think that's a very important topic. Here are some general ideas about privacy issues regarding SL and RL.

* If you post information in your SL "First Life" profile, that means you are making that information public and linking it to your SL identity.

* If you post information in your forum "Public Profile" (which anyone can pull up by clicking on your name next to a post and selecting "Public Profile", that means you are making that information public and linking it to your SL identity.

* If you personally run a website where you identify yourself as your SL avatar name, and you include publically viewable personal information about yourself, you are making that information public and linking it to your SL identity.

* If you are in SL or on the forums and openly tell people "I am Joe Smith in RL, and I live Anytown, USA, and I want the world to know," you are making that information public and linking it to your SL identity.

In the above cases, publically talking about any of this information in a way that links it to someone's SL identity is not a privacy violation, since the individual has directly linked this information on their own.

*** If you hear rumors (or start them) about a SL resident's RL identity, or have access to information that was never publically distributed in the ways described above, and you make this information known publically or to other specific individuals in a way that links RL information with their SL identity, you are violating that person's privacy.

Is that a good summary of how people understand the privacy policy in SL? If we get good feedback from everyone about this, we might consider updating the TOS to more explicitly explain this very important area.

At the very least I would sticky this post to the top of every forum it is concise and to the point....

Well, you might want to say that "infering something from information someone publically posts (from whois information) is a privacy violation".

Or did you just edit my post out of spite?

Absolutely clear. Thank you, Pathfinder.