SKW's NATASHA (1 Viewer)

[glutton]

Why do you insist so much on having her info posted on a forum? Go find the social networking profiles yourself if you want to see them, it should take less than 15 minutes if you aren't a moron.

 

[uraent]

Why do you insist so much on having her info posted on a forum? Go find the social networking profiles yourself if you want to see them, it should take less than 15 minutes if you aren't a moron.

I posted so many SNS informations about artists,
pixiv is also SNS for artists,but I had never been
asked to remove. So I ask "why these information were
asked to remove".

I only want to know "which kind of information is hated here".
on SNS information is hated? or easy got information is hated?
or respected actress information is hated?

I am willing to go with well such hate , if such hate is reasonable,
so I am ,in first step, asking which reason.
and I will go next as test is that reason is reasonable or not.

I do not want to recover these informations,
but I want to know which kind of informations are prohibited or strongly hated.
And I read some rules or sticky posts, there are not written such rules or manners.

So I am asking.

Edit: I made a post with mentioned 3 reasons information.
I suppose there must be some ask for remove.
If there are no ask , it means that mentioned 3 reasons are not established strictly, so other reasons will be mentioned here.

 

[Raden]

I suppose TW/FB are same online issue.
if someone want to separate somethings to other things,
It is not so hard to separate, and there are no privacy issue
in some video works actress's accounts.

Using same name and images of same person,
there are no privacy issue, and removing these informations
may become disturbance to the sales of video or
disturbance to her promotion.

That's their choice, bro. Sleeperkid supports it, so sales or not, he stands behind the wishes of his performers. So should we. She wanted it down, Onlinehero removed it. Also, we don't need rules about something that should be common sense and human decency. You know, things like "don't post other people's personal information" and all that.

 

[uraent]

>he stands behind the wishes of his performers. So should we.

Video seller wanted so ?
It is not privacy issue, but only a seller own issue.
Why video seller do not restrain her to use Twitter/Facebook?

If actress made her information open via using Twitter/Facebook,
it means that all of links are allowed.

>Also, we don't need rules about something that should be common sense and human decency.

In common sense and human decency, opened information can be
linked from anywhere without any notice.
So if such clame is allowed in this site,we must make it a local rule of this site
because link to open information is free and none can stop it.

And stating that as a local rule of site is only way to prevent
recurring this issue.

Such as "Never post link to xxxx's actress SNS".

By the way ,
I know new local rule which is not written in this site.
Are there any other such rules ?

 

[Raden]

So do you think that if there is no speed limit sign posted it means you can drive as fast as you want?

He doesn't prevent his talent from using Facebook etc.. because

1) he can't, and
2 he doesn't seem like a big enough dick to try to anyway.

And no, just because the profile is public doesn't mean it's free reign to post. If you leave your house unlocked when you go out, does that make it your fault when I come in and steal everything? I mean, technically, it would be your fault, but it's still something I'd go to jail for.

Come on man. Nobody's got any issue with this except you. If you don't know if it is okay to post, ask first.

 

[sleeperkid]

Thanks for the support, guys. It means a lot to Natasha and SKW's roster in general. :-)

 

[uraent]

So do you think that if there is no speed limit sign posted it means you can drive as fast as you want?

Yes , of course , if I bought unlimited net, I will use it fully.

He doesn't prevent his talent from using Facebook etc.. because

1) he can't, and
2 he doesn't seem like a big enough dick to try to anyway.

But he can prevent it by contract with the actress,
so it is some "failed as a contract". And we can help
to reduce the damage of failure.

And no, just because the profile is public doesn't mean it's free reign to post. If you leave your house unlocked when you go out, does that make it your fault when I come in and steal everything? I mean, technically, it would be your fault, but it's still something I'd go to jail for.

We are not thief, making link to opened information is like "get a flyer that has been distributed free of charge",
and we never call it thief, but you say so?

Come on man. Nobody's got any issue with this except you.

But linking to opened information is free and no need to prevent.
if there are some need to prevent, we must have local rule.

If you don't know if it is okay to post, ask first.

I ask again, Are there any issue which is allowed common but not allowed this site ?

And posting link to opened site is not prohibited, so some rule is needed.

 

[meepmeep]

I'd like to apologize. What I did was tasteless and offensive. I wish every social media user operating under delusions of anonymity/privacy who feels that the Internet owes them a modicum of civility the best of luck in the future.

 

[Raden]

Just don't get your unlimited cellphone internet from AT&T, they throttle it after 2 or 3 gigabytes... lol. And no, sorry, the speed limit is 50 kilometers per hour if not posted, up here, not "umlimited".

We do not need a broad catch-all rule for things that happen sporadically like this. We can just handle it on a case by case basis. She asked it taken down, SK came here on her behalf to ask it, the administrator edited it, therefore, it isn't acceptable, and the whole discussion is pretty much for nothing. Again, we don't (or we shouldn't, anyway) need rules for "don't be a dick".

 

[h0ly123]

I've got to agree with SK here. It'd be like if someone posted my real Facebook page all over the place here, but I keep my real identity separate from the online thing. It's a privacy thing, not to mention just basic respect.

Again, just playing devil's advocate (if she want's it gone, remove it), but you're not even remotely close to being in the same situation.

You aren't really putting yourself out there. There isn't photo and video of your face for thousands of people to see. You aren't using a variation of your real name in your username. It seems extremely naive that anyone would believe the info's not going to get out there considering everything in the situation. I mean, I've tried to take precautions, and I'm fairly certain if someone REALLY wanted to connect the real me to this account they could.

I wouldn't be happy if someone "outed" me, but at least it's fairly clear I'm trying to keep the two things separate considering I'm not using the same email address, a similar username to anything I use in the "real world", etc, etc, etc.

 

[Raden]

Well the vibe I got was that she didn't want it on a wrestling site, so it seems to me like she wants them unconnected. I dunno, I just understand where she is coming from with it, and don't think it's completely unreasonable.

 

[uraent]

>We do not need a broad catch-all rule for things that happen sporadically like this.

I do not say "catch-all" but this case is rare and clear violation to normal and
ordinary common sense about net,so it must be written as special issue.
Otherwise it will happen again.
Or you want this case happen again?

 

[Raden]

If it happens again, we can deal with it again. The report function works now, so no problem.

 

[uraent]

If it happens again, we can deal with it again. The report function works now, so no problem.

but we did not deal with this case yet.
I can access TW/FB account via google search's cash.

It means that "once happen no recover".

>The report function works now, so no problem.

I hope report function works faster than google Crawler.

 

[Raden]

The point is she did not want it posted here. It doesn't matter if you can find it through a search. I don't know what you are not understanding. At this point it seems like you're just looking for something to fight over.

 

[uraent]

The point is she did not want it posted here. It doesn't matter if you can find it through a search. I don't know what you are not understanding. At this point it seems like you're just looking for something to fight over.

You say that " she did not want it posted here "
but you say " posted here is not matter"

Do you want to avoid posting? or posting is OK ?

No block to post, it means that posting them again is not problem.

It is result of you told, and fight is over.
Do not need to reply, I understand what you say exactly .

 

[Raden]

No, I really don't think you do... I said "google searching does not matter" because it has no relevance to this. You can Google search and find it, however her non-wrestling stuff makes no mention of the wrestling related stuff, therefore, they are not connected. You don't have to use different names to keep things unconnected (I do to go that extra mile).

 

[uraent]

No, I really don't think you do... I said "google searching does not matter" because it has no relevance to this. You can Google search and find it, however her non-wrestling stuff makes no mention of the wrestling related stuff, therefore, they are not connected. You don't have to use different names to keep things unconnected (I do to go that extra mile).

Of coures I will not post them anywhere, but no block or no warning means that
this site allow such posts and only remove after known by someones.

>however her non-wrestling stuff makes no mention of the wrestling related stuff

But some wrestling fans are also fan of wrestlers,
so wrestling related stuff contains "wrestlers FB/TW or other SNS
even if it is not for wrestling". So all information about her is
allowed to post here these information.
The wrestling related matter contain wrestlers matter
and also wrestlers SNS information.

So I told again and again to prevent,but you say no
need to prevent, it means that you say that no problem
with posting them again for new comers.
if we are going to stop posting such
issue post, we must make rules of prohibition.

This is "our site only" and "violate to common sense but
member must follow" case,so we need rules of "this
site only and not common" for new comers.

Edit:
common sense 1:
any opened information can be linked from anywhere.
common sense 2:
wrestling matter contains wrestler matter and wrestler
SNS information.
common sense 3:
no local rule of prohibition or common sense allow means
these matters are allowed to do in that local.

 

[TheCrimsonRisk]

I think it's important for us to also respect that English is not uraent's first language and that might be leading to some confusion during this discussion. uraent, that is not meant as an insult in any way, in fact I admire you for remaining so active on the board even though it probably takes a lot time and effort for you to post in english. Thank you for that.

That said...

No block to post, it means that posting them again is not problem.

I know that you don't mean to offend, but this statement does seem rude. Everyone else is in agreement on this issue, so there is no need to block anyone or make any new rules. Those kinds of things only make a board less fun to be on. Clearly, posting something like this again could cause a problem. Let me put this simply:

If you think there's a chance that posting personal information could cause trouble for someone, then don't do it. It's fine that you want to share information and that anyone could find this information of they wanted to through Facebook, Google, etc...but it is not our place to be the ones to do so. There might be a case where someone connects their personal page to their professional work and they might actually WANT people to put their information out there. In that case, we should do so. But otherwise, just leave it alone. We are a close group, but we don't need to share everything, right?

I hope this did not seem too condescending or disrespectful. I really do consider you to be a valued member of this community and your posts are always welcome.

 

[uraent]

>posting personal information

information which are opened to net is not personal information,
but only common information.
And there are so many "common information" post to this site,

>.But otherwise, just leave it alone.

And "otherwise" and "that case" are same / can not be divided
by new comer, because if "site is opened to the net"
means that all information on the site are "common information"
and there are (if we do not make clear rules) no reason to prohibit link.

So if new comer have common sense of net(any link is not
prohibited), he will do it again. and if it is allowed, there are
no reason to remove original post.