Rusting Car Bumper

In another Forum there is/was another member named Blue_Metal who had some troubles in college.

Basically she was accussed of plagarism and (as far as I can tell) got caught red handed.

The original threads are here:

I think my teacher is going to...

For Anyone Who Cares

Well what happened was that an iidb member copied the threads and sent them to the school.

That thead is here:
Update on College

That person was Sakpo.
So the question is general. I repeat the question is GENERAL. (What do I mean? Please don't get into lame "I agree" or "I disagree" without some general discussion and please don't engage in he said she said without leading to some general issue.)

Is this kind of getting involved with something that isn't your business ethical or unethical? What are the implications of such decisions?

[Sakpo claims it was his/her business, BTW but I am going to take the opposite view for the sake of this discussion.]

DC

pug846

People write things all the time here that they wouldn’t want someone in real life to know. The person came here seeking advice; not to be outted by a member of the community. (It's worth noting that the topic was started in the support forum.) It would and should make other members worried about coming to the II and asking for real world advice and sharing personal details of their life. I think the person in question should be striped of their moderator duties. In my mind, it’s irrelevant that the person did give the information that was eventually used to forward the thread in question to relevant parties.

We’ve had other questions of legality and people being involved with questionably ethical behavior; I don’t want to stifle discussion on those issues. (How would you feel if someone, a Christian maybe?, were to forward a thread onto the local police force where a homosexual individual admitted to having sex with their same-sex partner in a state where such activity is outlawed? It was particularly ironic that at least one user, who I won’t name, thought it was a good idea, yet he/she has admitted to behavior on the II that would be quite damaging to his/her career.)

Although most of us should or do realize that information we share here is “public” in some sense, I think it’s wrong and a bad policy for people to reveal that information since there is some implicit trust there. (If there wasn’t that implicit trust, no one would share anything that they would be afraid could get back to someone who they didn’t want to know the information in question.)

It’s doubly worrisome that the person in question is a moderator.

But, that’s just my opinion.

edited to add: Good topic starter; i had meant to do the same. I'm curious if anyone shares my point of view. Most people seemed to agree with the decision.

cheetah

This is the first I read of the controversy, so I am still digesting it all but here's what I think.

What Sakpo did was not absolutely wrong. It was, however, a huge blindside that I don't think anyone on this board would expect. I think for this type of thing there should be a disclaimer or the specific person should warn someone before they do this type of thing. Yes, this is a "public place." However, the atmosphere here, and particularly in the SL&S forum, is that people can share information about themselves in a safe environment. Perhaps we have not all acknowledged that to be the case, and certainly, II never advertised that as a forum to come vent or whatever, but it is my opinion that there is an implicit atmosphere of trusting others here. I, being a skeptic, still try not to share too much info about myself, because there are people out there that will use it maliciously. But, if there is anyplace to meet and talk anonymously, everyone acknowledges the internet to be it. I think it is offensive and ruins the trust many of us have in this place. I know I won't talk anymore trash about the people I work with, etc., because someone might someday feel like reporting it back to them. I guess it's good in that it reminds us that we should all be careful. It's just wrong to do something like this without any warning.

Anyway, I agree with pug. Great example. If anyone can "tell on" anyone else at anytime, it should be made a big disclaimer at the top. What I liked about infidels is the atmosphere of sharing and what's the word? Where people open up about themselves and say what they might be unwilling to say unless you know them very well? Anyway, I liked that, but we should all be more careful about doing that now.

Ok, I'm not sure I addressed the post. I was giving my opinion about what sort of place II is and isn't. In general, aside even from these boards, I think it is unethical. Every different environment has ground rules and people act differently in different environments accordingly (I never swear at work, I don't wear flip flops to a fancy restaurant, etc.), and this environment's ground rules were never that people should take what is perceived to be said in confidence to people who are of like mind, and repeat it elsewhere. For instance, if I am walking down the street tellingmy friend a secret, she should still not tell everyone. Just because the street is apublic place (like discussion forums) and it is possible the info could fall into the wrong hands (an eavesdropper on the street or a surfer on the internet), the persons involved in the disucssion still have a moral obligation to keep the info to themselves.

As much as I like justice, and I think Blue_Metal deserves to learn many lessons for her own good, it was not my place to help those lessons along. Just like my co-workers sometimes tell me things about work I think is not right (lazy, not hard-working), I do not go around reporting everyone.

Ion

I am disturbed when reading about this.

What's ethical for me to do in a situation like this, is:

1) to not snitch on somebody, for this almost minor cheating;
after all, I saw more outrageous cheats in university, like a failing grade in one PhD exam not being reported to the administration due to a common ethnic background between a professor and the student, when working I saw a foreign-born (like me) colleague who couldn't speak elementary English but 'earned' a post-graduate degree in US from a public university that must have been infested with ethnic networking, I know of a professor claiming that "For me a good graduate student, is a student who never asks questions.", and much more of this kind of serious breach;

2) to not play self-righteous about minor cheating with the culprit -like many posters and moderators did in the threads I read on this example of plagiarism-, because we are all humans;

3) to reason with the culprit about future ethics, not to snitch on past minor difficulties;

4) to recognize that while someone plagiarizes a few times, and not making a profession out of it, bigger wrongdoings need addressing, like people instigating crimes, instigating wars and perpetrating more serious cheating -like I enumerated in 1), plus Olympic athletes caught on drugs and still getting medals, political briberies, cheating at work in one's main professional activity-;

it reminds me of when I was in the Eastern US, and I would get some traffic tickets for harmless speeding, or for illegal turn right when red on an empty street -so no traffic danger there warranting a ticket instead of a warning-, but these righteous cops chasing tickets-income forgot about 'Serve and Protect' with crime ramping big time around them;

or better, it reminds me of Linda Tripp snitching in public on Bill Clinton, with what Monica Lewinski confided to Tripp about Clinton when trusting Tripp.

Kachana

Whilst I don't like to label the action as "right" or "wrong", I was quite shocked when I read what had happened, and certainly wouldn't have done that myself.

I'm glad the Dean deemed the evidence unworthy, I believe we should be able to talk our troubles over with others, even if to (possibly) entertain a tactic that is underhand. It is then up to us, based on such conversations, whether we choose to continue through with our underhand action or not. If we do, we should hope that such mechanisms are in place to catch our underhand actions and reprimand us accordingly. But to pass on the thread was tantamount to thought policing in my view, Blue Metal was entertaining possibilities, on a support forum, thinking things through with others, to work out what course of action to take. If there's one place one should be allowed to make a mistake, or entertain an unethical decision, without fear of reprimand, it should be on an advice/support forum.

I do it especially unnerving that the thread was on the support forum. This is a public forum yes, but this site tries hard, and I believes has a fair amount of success, in nurturing a caring and forgiving atmosphere in forums such as that. It's function is to support people, and in fact, when a post is written that doesn't support someone, we are explicitly told by the moderators to go away. Not only does the current action seem to do away with that principle, it also implicitly accepts that anything written on that board that someone may deem "unethical" is fair game to be passed on to relevant others; to ascertain what is unethical or not it seems one only needs to have a personal conviction and a philosophical friend to back you up.

If we were all to follow this principle the very function of the support forum would become untenable, since so many matters that people need support in are matters involving the ethical treatment of other people, for instance fidelity, respect, lying, running away, treatment of children and family, working ethics etc..

A question for those who support the action: Do you give me permission to read through all of your past threads and pass on any information I (and my philosophically trained friend) find to be unethical to the relevant people (assuming I have, or can obtain, their contact details)?

This may include such actions as me telling your employers that you cheat them by skiving time off work to post on II, telling your spouse what you really say about religion to your kids, telling your parents what drugs you have done or bought with money you got from them, telling your employers that you weren't ill that day, telling your parents that you have (or are considering) run(ning) away from home and where you intend to go, telling your loved ones that you are lying to them about your sexuality, telling your loved ones that you are lying to them about your religious beliefs, and so on and so on.

I didn't mean to write for this long, but I am quite sad that if I need support on some sensitive issue, it probably won't be this board I come to. And I'm aware that one could forward an argument to the effect that that the Blue Metal issue is unethical, but all of my examples aren't, but the point is, without any clear guidelines and lines of demarcation about what information we may or may not forward to others (for instance, explicitly outlined in forum rules) on such a notoriously subjective issue with so many grounds for debate, one might as well just work out one's problems in the cold comfort of one's own head.

[EDIT: Apologies if my reply wasn't general enough re: getting involved with other people's business, but I believe the specifics of the case are important in making such a decision. I would however always get involved if I thought someone was in direct danger and my intervention could prevent that, otherwise, I find it best not to poke my nose in. If someone falls foul of an underhad tactic this way, then they'd better develop a better way of finding out about it rather than relying on snitches]

Ion

I am sad about this, too.

Plagiarizing a few times in university exams when overwhelmed by the course load, is not a crime worth snitching about, to the school or to the FBI.

Defiant Heretic

One thing to consider is that most of us post under a pseudonym. This would imply that a certain level of anonymity is expected to be upheld by those who read these threads, even if information comes to light that could reveal the posters identity. Although I have no sympathy whatsoever for Blue_Metal (and think she got off light), I disagree with Sakpo’s decision to reveal the information she posted here.

I think that situations presented here should be treated almost as hypothetical. We should not interfere with the lives of members.

Celsus

Hi all,

So far I have to say, very well said to all who've posted so far. While we should speak up when we feel a person is in the wrong, we should also be aware that it is not ours to judge or influence the executioner. Leave the self-righteous bullshit to the self-righteous theists.

Joel

Ion

I agree, Joel.

(I remember you as joejoejoe, from a past thread).

Jobar

I think that Blue Metal got pretty much what she deserved; such foolishness piled atop dishonesty deserves worse punishment than she will get, IMO. She might possibly benefit from the real-world lesson taught to her by this situation. If what she had done involved some felony crime, she would deserve a spot on America's Dumbest Criminals.

But, as a general principle, I think it's wrong to speak out on things which do not jeapordize someone's life in a direct manner, or considerable property. If someone runs their mouth about a car theft ring, or a possible murder, or a potential suicide, and the evidence given seems very credible- then yes, notify whatever authority seems appropriate.

This instance, though, is too pickayune a transgression for that.

All of us have things to hide, some of us more than others. As long as those things are not costing someone blood or huge sums of money, I think we should hold silent.

All of us should have better sense than to admit any felonies, obviously. But if someone confesses to a misdemeanor here, in SL&S particularly, IMO we should confine our comments to this board.

Some while back, we had a member who came from a fundamentalist Islamic nation. If that member's posts had been handed to the religious authorities there, they might have suffered punishment up to and including beheading. Which of us would have committed such an enormity, just because they were a felon to the religious tyrants in that land? (None of us would, I know, and that is an extreme case. But the principle involved is the same, I think.)