Jump to content
RuchiVee

Sex Offenders on SL

Recommended Posts

So, now attempting to silence me by shutting down the thread?  This seems agenda-driven.  I see what's going on here:

1. Dogpile on someone who disagrees with you

2. Attempt to goad her into violating the forum community guidelines

3. Insult and flame her in an attempt to shame her into silence

4. If all else fails, converge and vote for shutting down the thread

EDIT:  After all tactics have failed, return to step one and repeat in a war of attrition.

So much for civil discourse. 

 

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, RuchiVee said:

EDIT:  And now you've called me a troll.  I'm not a troll.  If anything, calling me names is what's trolling, and now I'm reporting you for it.

You may as well report everyone in the thread RuchiVee.

21 minutes ago, Cindy Evanier said:

Plus tongue biting so as not to repeat what many have already said

No, please don't bite it too hard Cindy, you are sweet and I don't want to see you with a sore tongue!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

You may as well report everyone in the thread RuchiVee.

No, please don't bite it too hard Cindy, you are sweet and I don't want to see you with a sore tongue!

See my earlier thread.  This is tactic #1.  So...an addendum...after all four tactics have been employed to no avail, return to the first step and repeat.

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RuchiVee said:

I was wondering if, since sex offenders are required by federal and state laws to register and make public certain information about themselves in RL, if there was some requirement that they do the same somewhere in the SL database to caution other users.  I checked the community guidelines, and found nothing -- in fact, I found this, which, if anything, is somewhat antithetical:  "Sharing someone else’s personal information—of any kind—is not allowed. Disclosing another Resident’s real-world identity, contact information, or the text of interpersonal communications (chat, email, IM) is not allowed."  This, of course, would prohibit another user from divulging a sex offender's identity, if the user knew it (and conduct that may violate conditions of a probation or parole) but doesn't speak to whether the sex offender himself/herself should be required to divulge his/her own identity.  

I ask because another user divulged his real-life identity to me, and then subsequently behaved in a way that was arguably inappropriate.  Suspicious, I ran a check on a sexual predator database, and, lo and behold, this person is a real-life, twice-convicted sex offender against victims who were both underage.  I fear that this person may attempt to victimize people on SL (see my related thread here, which was partly serious, and partly tongue-in-cheek -- and has gone far off the rails by now -- but which I refer to in all seriousness in the instant post), and I seem to be precluded by the community guidelines from doing anything about it.  That said, those same community guidelines also seem to preclude forum-goers from posting anything that does not "keep your commentary relevant to the discussion and within the format that the forum, board or question and answer area," and the respondents of the aforementioned link are not following that.  So...it seems some violation of the community guidelines is permitted, even frivolously.  Therefore it seems reasonable to conclude that a guideline such as the one mentioned in the first paragraph could be violated for a reason as important as this.

If you don't see it in the TOS or the community standards,then it's more than likely not a thing..

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ceka Cianci said:

If you don't see it in the TOS or the community standards,then it's more than likely not a thing..

 

Thank you, Ceka, for returning to civil discourse.  That's what I was asking.  I appreciate your response.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuchiVee said:

See my earlier thread.  This is tactic #1.

Sorry you can't accept the advice, it's good advice. The Lab kick out sex offenders. They have no tolerance for them.

That's the rules.

beats me why you won't help them do this with an AR. Just why you want to keep the sex offenders in SL with your silly megan's list for SL idea?

The only reason I can think of is you are trolling. Your last troll thread was seen through and derailed too fast, so you fall back to something more confrontational hoping for a few more pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

Sorry you can't accept the advice, it's good advice. The Lab kick out sex offenders. They have no tolerance for them.

That's the rules.

beats me why you won't help them do this with an AR. Just why you want to keep the sex offenders in SL with your silly megan's list for SL idea?

The only reason I can think of is you are trolling. Your last troll thread was seen through and derailed too fast, so you fall back to something more confrontational hoping for a few more pages.

Who says I haven't reported this offender since I asked the earlier question?  I asked that question yesterday.

And there's nothing "silly" about Megan's Law (not "Megan's list")...it's a law that exists in every state of the United States, and at the Federal level as well.  It exists in all these places for a reason, and there's nothing "silly" or "barbaric" about protecting children from sexual predators.  In fact, allowing repeat sexual predators to roam communities (real life or online) in the shadows to continue to prey on people is what is barbaric...that kind of lawlessness is what actual barbarism entails.

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RuchiVee said:

And there's nothing "silly" about Megan's Law (not "Megan's list")...it's a law that exists in every state of the United States, and at the Federal level as well.  It exists in all these places for a reason.

Why are you not accepting the advice... mute and AR the "sex offender"

The Lab will ban him.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

Why are you not accepting the advice... mute and AR the "sex offender"

The Lab will ban him.

Who says I haven't accepted the advice?  Again, let's not make up false facts to support a false narrative.

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuchiVee said:

Who says I haven't accepted the advice?  Again, let's not make up false facts to support a false narrative.

Then why not just return to the thread and say.. thanks for the advice.  I have ...<state what you decided to do>  and move on?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuchiVee said:

Who says I haven't accepted the advice?  Again, let's not make up false facts to support a false narrative.

So, now that he is reported and the Lab investigate his status (they have his full name and credit card after all) they ban him if guilty, and they let him live if not.

If the lab let him live... is he guilty?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Callum Meriman said:

So, now that he is reported and the Lab investigate his status (they have his full name and credit card after all) they ban him if guilty, and they let him live if not.

If the lab let him live... is he guilty?

A legal body, whether a court or a jury of twelve of his peers, has already considered all the evidence in two separate sex offense cases, and determined that he is guilty in each of the two separate cases.  What Linden Labs does is irrelevant with respect to his legal guilt of sex offenses.

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuchiVee said:

A legal body, whether a court or a jury of twelve of his peers, has already considered all the evidence in two separate sex offense cases, and determined that he is guilty in each of the two separate cases.  What Linden Labs does is irrelevant with respect to his legal guilt of sex offenses.

Answer the question.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Callum Meriman said:

Answer the question.

I don't have to play by your rules, first of all.

And second of all, I did answer the question.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RuchiVee said:

I don't have to play by your rules, first of all.

And second of all, I did answer the question.

So your answer is... "I, from a photo, know better then the Lab who have his real name and address and credit card number"

Edited by Callum Meriman
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RuchiVee said:

another user divulged his real-life identity to me

This is the part I am having trouble with.  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

So your answer is... "I, from a photo, know better then the Lab who have his real name and address and creid card number"

Again, let's not manufacture facts to support a false narrative.  You asked me if he was guilty. I said that a jury or judge has found him guilty in two separate sex offense cases.  Question answered.

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cindy Evanier said:

This is the part I am having trouble with.  

Yes, that was troubling, Cindy.  I didn't want to know this information and I didn't want his photo, but he divulged both without solicitation in an attempt to have me do the same.  I did not take the bait.  But I did check his information in the sex offender database -- it all matched, including the photo (a different photo, but nevertheless obviously the same person) -- and discovered that he has twice been convicted of sex offenses against underage women.  That's why I was concerned that he was using SL to prey on women.

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know,the only place they have to report themselves to is the local police in the city or town they are living in..

I don't think they have to report themselves to everyplace they do business with..

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuchiVee said:

Yes, that was troubling, Cindy.  I didn't want to know this information, but he divulged it without solicitation in an attempt to have me do the same.  I did not take the bait.  But I did check his information in the sex offender database and discovered that he has twice been convicted of sex offenses against underage women.  That's why I was concerned that he was using SL to prey on women.

Yeah but if I divulge that I am Kylie Minogue  in rl  (down boys I am taken )   or any name I choose.  Why believe it?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RuchiVee said:

Let's not manufacture facts to support a false narrative.  You asked me if he was guilty. I said that a jury or judge has found him guilty in two separate sex offense cases.  Question answered.

Let me put it one post.

1. The Lab ban sex offenders without mercy. It's in the TOS.
2. If you report someone as a sex offender the Lab are duty bound to investigate.
3. The Lab have the person's name, address and credit card.
4. The Lab have the ability to talk to the local authorities.
5. If after all this investigation the Lab don't ban this person.... guess what...

He isn't a really sex offender, you were tricked.

That's why vigilateism is wrong.

If the lab delete him, then justice is served, the pixel kids in SL are safe
If the lab don't delete him, then he was not on a real sex offender list.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cindy Evanier said:

Yeah but if I divulge that I am Kylie Minogue  in rl  (down boys I am taken )   or any name I choose.  Why believe it?

Because he didn't claim he was Kylie Minogue.  He gave me his name, a nickname, a Facebook page, a photo, and offered to give me more, like his phone number, etc.  He was very persistent.  He gave me a lot of information.  That's more than just a name. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

Let me put it one post.

1. The Lab ban sex offenders without mercy. It's in the TOS.
2. If you report someone as a sex offender the Lab are duty bound to investigate.
3. The Lab have the person's name, address and credit card.
4. The Lab have the ability to talk to the local authorities.
5. If after all this investigation the Lab don't ban this person.... guess what...

He isn't a really sex offender, you were tricked.

That's why vigilateism is wrong.

If the lab delete him, then justice is served, the pixel kids in SL are safe
If the lab don't delete him, then he was not on a real sex offender list.

Let me elaborate...Linden Labs is not a court of law. 

Linden Labs doesn't determine if a criminal is guilty or not. 

A judge or jury, depending upon which type of trial an offender chooses, makes that determination. 

If a judge or jury has found him guilty...twice, no less...based on evidence presented by attorneys for both parties and examined by a fact-finder, some computer programmer in a lab in California who is reviewing a diminished record has no bearing on the legal guilt of the criminal.

So, yes, the criminal is still guilty of sex offenses for doing what he did to whose underage women, regardless of whether Linden Labs thinks that his current online behavior has violated the terms of service.

 

Edited by RuchiVee
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Callum Meriman said:

Let me put it one post.

1. The Lab ban sex offenders without mercy. It's in the TOS.
2. If you report someone as a sex offender the Lab are duty bound to investigate.
3. The Lab have the person's name, address and credit card.
4. The Lab have the ability to talk to the local authorities.
5. If after all this investigation the Lab don't ban this person.... guess what...

He isn't a really sex offender, you were tricked.

That's why vigilateism is wrong.

If the lab delete him, then justice is served, the pixel kids in SL are safe
If the lab don't delete him, then he was not on a real sex offender list.

I thought that was for someone committing those things using sl as kind of a gateway..

What section is this in,in the TOS? I'm gonna go give it a read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...