Sociopath Community

Many moons ago, I wrote something which would help Luna to keep herself clear of legal liability for some of the, ahem, "questionable" activities on this site. She refused to address it directly because I was a frequent target of her bans, back when she muted people for saying things she didn't like. Still, many people expressed their approval at the time, and I think it could prove helpful to the current discussion, so I am re-posting it. Please bear with the shitty formatting. It's a proxy thing.

FIGHT CLUB RULES 1- The first rule of Fightclub is, you do not talk about Fightclub. 2- The second rule of Fightclub is, You DO NOT talk about FIGHT CLUB. (That was obligatory, but facetious. :D) 3- The third rule of Fightclub is that you have to be 18+ in order to brawl here. 4- The fourth rule of Fightclub is that in verbal sparring matches, anything goes. A person shall not be banned, or have their posts deleted or moderated for: a) Obscene language b) Explicit sexual references and innuendos c) Expressing an ill opinion of another Fightclub member, or in any way disparaging them. By agreeing to this stipulation, the member implicitly agrees that they are stepping into an environment where they will get cyber bullied. Your comments here constitute an expression of your legal consent to this. 5- The fifth rule of Fightclub is that no person is to post any child pornography of any sort. This type of material will be submitted to the authorities, you sick fuck. 6- The sixth rule of Fightclub is that any person who posts here consents to the risk of his real identity being exposed. 7- The seventh and most gentlemanly rule of Fightclub is that ANY SUCH EXPOSURES REMAIN PRIVATE. By this, we refer specifically to clear violations of a person’s identity- be it professional or personal. No facebook pestering, Google+ spamming, etc.

Doxing is typically done with malicious intent, which is precisely why it's unacceptable behavior. Being on a sociopath forum does not give anyone anymore right to post another member's personal information than it does anywhere else, especially if that information could potentially harm them and/or their family and friends in some form or another.

It's all fun and games to expose someone else until it happens to you or someone you care about. Doxing is not a joke. It is a serious matter that could result in legal action against the person who did the doxing and possibly the owner of the site. Therefore, in my opinion, there should be a rule against it to protect those who frequent this forum, and anyone personally associated with them.

On a final note, the site owner has made it very clear that she can over-rule any decision here. There is no rule that indicates she can't remove another member's personal information that has been exposed. That is something that some of you might want to remember.

The term would mostly be the attribute of fucktard retaliatory simpletons. Otherwise I would assign it as a reliable label to denigrate your opponents.

Seriously? That is your objection? Call it whatever you want. I personally liked the "Strife Club" suggestion someone gave, or " societe combatif". Anyway, here is a link to the original topic. http://www.sociopath-community.com/topic/2014-03-06/fight-club-rules You'll be pleased to note that I removed the 8th clause in the re-post, Princess Petunia. :p

Going into the extreme of gathering personal info of online strangers just for the heck of it (and without even being paid for it) displays a pathological level of involvement = only sick obsessive suckers with no life would do that.

Well, you can't exactly call those guidelines "rules"- except in terms of how they apply to moderators. (As in, the moderator cannot ban users for swearing, insulting, denigrating, sexual content, etc.- all of which happen daily, here.) Thus, your objection on the basis of waiting until these issues "first occur" is irrelevant to the discussion, because these occur continuously and repeatedly on this forum. In the meantime, Luna remains potentially criminally liable for the actions of users here, because they have not provided informed consent. It is like a set of guidelines which safeguard the anarchic culture here, whilst protecting Luna from legal liability. The only other "issues" addressed concern providing consent to doxing (the subject you have chosen to bring up, currently) and getting cyber-bullied. It also contains a proviso against CP, another potential legal liability for the owner of the site. Yet another benefit of a mutually agreed upon ToS is that it can be used to hold future moderators to an objective standard. If they fail and resort to emotional bans, they're out. Surely you don't object to that? ;)

ToS is good as long as it grants users here room to do more instead of less.

My opinion more or less matches up with Systematic's comment.

I don't mind the act of doxing being scrutinized itself, but to me it seems like it's one more step to carrying this forum towards further moderation. 

I'm okay with people and myself having the chance of being outed, it's honestly part of what makes this forum fun for me. I also see it can be used to validify the claims of other's here. If users knew they were protected against being exposed, the bullshit ratio would sky rocket in my opinion. This forum has ran fine with it, yes we've lost some members but that amount of freedom has attracted more than we've lost. 

Yes Pink, I agree. There are some people who just post on the internet without the thought that everyone may be out to get them.

does anyone actually think these rules will stop anything ..?

if someone really wants to do something, he will anyway.