People who seek out hazers on the internet
 

Discussion/poll time:

What are your views on individuals who constantly search for pictures (on webshots and other websites that host photos) on the internet that could possibly depict hazing of some sort?

Do you think a group should be accused of hazing based on a photograph, when the context is not known and the accuser was not present at the time?

Do you think people that patrol such websites looking for pictures should enjoy anonymity on discussion boards (such as GC), even though they willingly interview with newspapers and let their names show in print?

Do you think that people who frequently and publicly do this accusing are a germain topic of discussion among greeks?

If your name appears in a newspaper, you are not entitled to have it removed if a portion of that article is posted on GC.

Danielle, please don't harass others. I lub you!

Did you create this thread to see if you can get another group of people to back you up? Baby you don't need them...you got me!

-Rudey

I think there are a couple different topics here.

First is, trolling the 'net to look at hazing pictures. Do I think it's right? Well, I think hazing is wrong. And yes, I think it should be reported.

But if someone wants to spend his time trolling young girls' (and boys') online photo albums...well, that's HIS time, not mine.

(Personally, I do not think that people should share personal photos with the general public - that's why there are passworded sites!)

Secondly is the anonymity. If a person is identified in a news article - and gave their permission - then, what's the difference if his name is posted on a newspaper's site vs. being posted here? I think "public figure" comes into play...?

Now, if the person DID NOT give the paper permission to use his name, then that's another legal issue.

Why WOULDN'T a name that was posted in a news article be posted here? Heck, I've posted many articles from newspapers that named people's names... what's the difference from being named on one public site vs another?

I agree.

I also think that there are better uses of our time and better ways to combat hazing than surfing the internet looking for 'evidence' of hazing in places that we don't really have anything to do with.

Not that I want to start something with you, AchtungBaby... but who are YOU to tell ME how I can spend MY time?

If I choose to ignore my real life responsibilities, spend all my time surfing the web, looking at pictures of people I don't know, then why the heck do YOU care?


:confused:

why do YOU care if she cares? we could do this all day.

Yes, if someone is SO CONCERNED about their name being mentioned on GC then they should shut the $&*)#@ up and not talk to reporters.

And to answer the original questions:

What are your views on individuals who constantly search for pictures (on webshots and other websites that host photos) on the internet that could possibly depict hazing of some sort?

- I think it sounds pretty unstable. It's one thing if it's something you're involved in yourself - a group or place you frequent etc. But to go trolling around the internet looking for things that have nothing to do with you...well, that's really shady and pretty darn creepy.

It sounds a little bit too much like online predators for my liking.

Do you think a group should be accused of hazing based on a photograph, when the context is not known and the accuser was not present at the time?

- No, I don't. I can look through my photo albums and see pictures that make one thing look like another. I would never think to public out someone b/c of a photo that had nothing to do with me, ESPECIALLY if I had never talked to the people involved in the story to get their version of things. It could be completely misconstrued and you could be ruining people's lives over misunderstanding what you see. For someone to do that makes me think they secretly want attention for themselves and care nothing about the actual issue of hazing.

Do you think people that patrol such websites looking for pictures should enjoy anonymity on discussion boards (such as GC), even though they willingly interview with newspapers and let their names show in print?

- NO WAY. That is absolutely, positively ridiculous. If your name appears in print you already gave up the right to be anonymous. You can't have your cake and eat it too - you either play Mr/Ms Crusader for Justice Even When It's Not My Business and deal with what comes with that, or you stop doing what gets your name in the public domain in the first place.

Do you think that people who frequently and publicly do this accusing are a germain topic of discussion among greeks?

- Yes, I do.

We are talking about Hoosier I suppose.

I think Hoosier is making the point that GLOs get gleefully hammered by Colleges for the same things they overlook in their sports teams and clubs.

So hoosier seems to want to make it personal to those administrators by exposing what the college is overlooking.

On the surface that may seem cool, but can have a lot of unintended consequences. The students or organizations can be disciplined, disbanded, or embarrassed.

And its not going to make colleges lay off GLOs its just going to create more victims that are being brought to sacrifice on the altar of political correctness.

Also, it just seems petty . . . to me.

Its like if my chapter got busted for partying so I went out of my way to get the remaining chapters busted.

And its also a violation of the Guy Code "ratting."
The Guy Code is pretty clear that you don't involve yourself uninvited in someone else's business unless . . .unless . . . actually I don't think there is a guideline, its decided on a case by case basis.

And the Guy Code is even stricter when it comes to interfering with other people's fun. You just don't do it.

This all being said: If its something he wants to do, obviously its his time to spend as he wishes.

Truth. I'd think that if one were very concerned about hazing, one would find a more constructive way to deal with it. ASSUMING that pictures found on the internet depict hazing is making quite a leap.

Is it also a violation of the guy code to go running to the moderators when somebody posts a news article in a thread you started on a website because said article includes your name, when you willingly exposed yourself to coverage in said newspaper by emailing pictures you found on the internet to university administrators?

Correction.

He goes running to *A* MODERATOR. Singular. Not plural. :p

Quite a few people on this chatsite have their names out there. Are people just going to just start posting all those details now? I mean since all anonymity is gone.

And John already decided that hoosier's name should not be posted. He is the administrator. Was there something left up to discussion?

You guys can put him on ignore. Why don't you?

-Rudey

I wouldn't care, if I liked and wanted the attention.

But we're not really talking about ME here, in case you didn't get it.

I think she is just teasing . . .

I guess the new question is:

What do you think of moderators that break the rules that the administrator of this website lays out and then harass other users?

-Rudey
--Anyone?

The administrator of this board has said that it is his feeling that if someone asks that his/her name not be used, it shouldn't be used.

That is the case in this situation.

If I find a post naming someones name whom I know has asked not to be indentified in this forum, I will delete either the name or the entire post.

If John changes his mind, I will change my practice.

Re: People who seek out hazers on the internet
 

NO. This happened recently to a group I know of. An under-aged drinker had posted pictures of herself doing shots, drinking, etc. that were taken BEFORE she pledged her sorority. In another area of her webshots album, she posted pictures from her current (at that time, anyways) pledge period. "Someone" assumed the drinking photos were from the same period, so they turned notified Greek Life that this girl was being hazed based on these photos. The sorority in question got in loads of trouble, not knowing why. When it was finally revealed they were in trouble over these webshots photos, the girl came forward and was able to prove that the pics were taken more than a year prior to her pledging.

It was a big hoopla over nothing.

This thread contains a very recent example of someone falsely accusing people of hazing: http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...threadid=74844

And another question:

What do you think of the users that break the rules that the administrator of this website lays out and then harass other moderators?

Anyone? Pookies?

Seek,Target, Kill!:(

Are you referring to yourself? I think you should be banned.

-Rudey
--Must be hard to keep sweating me while pretending you have me on ignore.

How was it false?

Again you have the option of putting Hoosier on ignore.

You chose not to.

You also did not choose to PM Hoosier but to repeatedly harass him on the website in public.

I only want to be kind to you and have you be kind to others. Is that too much to ask for?

-Rudey
--You can be great!

It was only fair to ask that question. But if you're going to talk about mods harassing users and users harassing mods, then I don't think this is the appropriate thread for it.

And for the record, I haven't had you on ignore for a while now.

But too bad no one really cares what you think. :)

Have a great weekend you sexy beast you.

I highly doubt it's appropriate to shit talk about your girlfriend like that, Bobby.

Anyway, I'm done.

Have fun shit talking about me, though! I'm especially enjoying the lies you're attempting to spread about me. I'm shocked that you couldn't be any more creative! :)

Continue to poke fun at me amongst yourselves....:D

I think Rudey is in love with OTW :D

Are you on drugs? At least be funny...just a little.

-Rudey

If it's not love, then it's definitely obsession.

Take an English lesson before you start defining anything.

-Rudey
--By the way I don't believe we've ever spoken, so what's with your sudden interest in me?

I missed the post. What'd it say? :(

-AXiD670
--Stupid shopping at the mall makes me miss everything.

My question: Is it possible to delete threads when they are very blatantly aimed at "attacking" (for lack of a better word) one certain poster and add nothing to the gc community?

Apparently. ;)

I was thinking that this one should be deleted.

so OTW can violate any rule she wants, she cusses and attacks other posters. yet when people give it back to her, their post gets deleted.


Good job moderators.


SUch pure BS.


Oh but wait, OTW is such a huge deal. So nevermind. She can go hang out with the former 4th member of Hansen since she knew him before he was a member of Hansen.

Yes. If a moderator in the particular forum agrees that it is an attack on a specific person or people. That's assuming I understand your question correctly.

You don't think this entire thread should be deleted? What purpose does it really serve?

-Rudey

I think the original question of the thread is legitimate.

I will continue to delete posts that make unsubstantiated comments about alcoholism or mental illness or those that imply the same.