Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Jetamors ([info]jetamors) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2005-02-13 01:28:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Gobsmacked

Oh noes, pedophilia!!
This is long.

Okay, so there's this place online called the Straight Dope Message Boards. It was originally created to be an adjunct to Cecil Adams' column, but it's morphed way beyond that to several forums and several thousand members. Number one rule: don't be a jerk. If you're a jerk, you get banned.

Unsurprisingly, this has led to a long and wanky history; just take a look at [info]trainwreckspot, the last in a line of several anonymous communities entirely devoted to SDMB wank. And the current wank may just trump them all. Here's the Cliff's Notes Version.


Stage Manager ([info]stagemanager) admits in a thread to being a registered sex offender. A few days later, he is suddenly banned. These posts have now been hidden, and I never saw them, so I can't really comment on whether or not that was a legitimate decision. [ETA: Anonymice, however, know all.]

[info]stagemanager is upset, obviously, and makes this post in the SDMB community.


Tuba Diva ([info]tubadiva) takes it on herself to post a lot of [info]stagemanager's personal information, obtained through the Megan's Law database of sex offenders. The post has now been screened, but you can see responses here, and a c&p with personal information deleted can be seen here. In the course of these accusations, she also reveals that [info]stagemanager was banned for trolling for minors on the boards.


Obviously, this sets off a firestorm of controversy. Did [info]stagemanager actually have inappropriate contact with an SDMB minor? Did [info]tubadiva abuse the LJ or SDMB privacy policy by posting [info]stagemanager's publicly available information? (The title of this post implies that she refrained from revealing information on the board itself, but felt no need to restrain herself outside it.)

[info]stagemanager reveals that he did have contact with a minor, electronic contact, though he refuses to elaborate further.


The drama makes it to trainwreckspot, where the snark flows long and furious. Other admins start closing and locking threads to get time to figure out what's going on. Dopers get testy.

Administrator Veb (or someone pretending to be her) claims that there's a legal investigation going on. [info]stagemanager says that there couldn't be a serious investigation, since he hasn't been contacted. Stage Manager threatens to sue the boards; as an aside, it's been long claimed that any hint of litigation wll be grounds to immediately end the SDMB, so people begin to take this Very Seriously.

There's also lots of wank in the TWS thread that I won't even bother to link to; wild theories, people being for or against [info]tubadiva's actions. Pretty much everyone is withholding judgement on [info]stagemanager, except for a few who have Absolute! Proof! that he did what he's being accused of. Also lots of legal stuff about whether or not Tuba actually violated any privacy policies, since it's possible to get SM's info through non-credit card avenues.

Finally, Tuba Diva's punishment is devised. And of course, there is wank, since paying users are apparently not a big priority to the Reader (SD's parent org) and a 30 day suspension is little more than a slap on the wrist.

ETA: The punishment announcement thread has been locked and hidden. The text of the first post is available here, though. I'm sure your imagination can fill in the rest.


Not sure how much interest this will have to people not on the SDMB, but I figured I'd write it up for my own amusement as much as anyone else's.



(Post a new comment)


[info]wolfsamurai
2005-02-13 08:46 am UTC (link)
Maybe it's just me, but everybody involved in this seems ~incredibly~ whiny. Regardless of what side they're on.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-13 09:25 am UTC (link)
Hah! I've thinking that all this was FW-worthy. Did you see this new thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=302107), about the privacy issues, and this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=302141), where the OP calls out one of the admins and everyone else goes on about The Issues, again?

(Reply to this)


[info]gal_montag
2005-02-13 10:30 am UTC (link)
Randomly, don't you have to be *convicted* of something to have to register under Megan's Law? I can't imagine people being willing to register to be on a sex offender list (especially since the assumption is that you're a pedophile) without it being a condition of their parole.

Although that guy seems awfully flip about the whole thing for someone who's probably in some serious trouble.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-13 01:26 pm UTC (link)
Maybe, maybe not. I think it depends on jurisdiction. I've heard of people who are "registered sex offenders" as a result of teenaged consensual sex with a partner of similar but slightly younger age under statutory rape provisions. I've also heard of registered sex offenders whose offense was consensual gay sex in places where it isn't/wasn't legal.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]megmurry
2005-02-13 08:25 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, I think it's a bit obnoxious that those sorts of cases are listed alongside violent serial rapists and child molesters without any indication of how dangerous a posted person might be.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mertonfanatic
2005-02-13 01:38 pm UTC (link)
Not always. My fiance's ex tried to have him conviced of molesting his year old daughter. The judge threw out the first half of the case and the jury gave him a not guilty based on insufficiant evidence from the prosecution.

This was three years ago. We've just now, this past fall, gotten his name removed from the sex offender list after a two year battle. His name was supposed to be erased after the trial had ended. It caused all kinds of problems for him in regards to finding a job and such.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mertonfanatic
2005-02-13 01:40 pm UTC (link)
Convicted. God I can't spell this morning. >_

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]megmurry
2005-02-13 08:25 pm UTC (link)
Holy shit, that sucks. Glad you finally got it taken care of.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mertonfanatic
2005-02-14 02:09 am UTC (link)
Thanks. Yeah it did. He used to drive bus, but luckily was able to get a job driving tractor trailers.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]panthea
2005-02-13 11:36 pm UTC (link)
Your username wouldn't happen to refer to Paul Merton, would it?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mertonfanatic
2005-02-14 01:28 am UTC (link)
Sadly, no. It refers to the character Merton Dingle from Big Wolf on Campus.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]panthea
2005-02-14 01:31 am UTC (link)
Ah well. More Paul for me. *g*

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sesana
2005-02-14 06:05 am UTC (link)
Don't mind me if I squee a bit. I miss Merton badly.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mertonfanatic
2005-02-14 02:23 pm UTC (link)
Oh please squee all you'd like, I still do!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mistressrenet
2005-02-13 04:08 pm UTC (link)
I believe you do.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]memoriamvictus
2005-02-13 06:42 pm UTC (link)
You must be convicted, but given the wide, wonderful world of morality laws on the books in some states, it can get interesting. I have a friend who registers because, when he was 17, he mooned a cop in the presence of some of his teenaged friends. Indecent exposure in front of minors!

I've heard some horror stories about different jurisdictions (California in particular) taking the actions to place defendants on the registry while their cases are still being heard, and having to battle it in spite of innocent verdicts, but I've yet to actually hear from someone this has happened to.

And the language is somewhat misleading... 'lewd and lascivious behavior with a child under 14' sounds dreadful and, the world being what it is, probably was, but it also could have been something as simple as the fellow sunbathing nude without a high fence and his neighbors having a fit.

Sorry. I'll shut up so we needn't move this to i_wank. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mambo
2005-02-13 07:54 pm UTC (link)
Yeah; an uncle of mine was put onto the sex offenders list after he was caught pissing in some shrubs. He was at a concert, and half the toilets were either clogged or had a twenty plus line to them.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-13 07:59 pm UTC (link)
You can get on the registered sex offenders list for having any sort of 'inapporate' contact with anyone under 18.

This inculdes a 16 year old seeing a guy getting off in his van.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-14 03:59 am UTC (link)
Well, he is convicted. A while ago there was something involving a teen, apparently. He was convicted, he registered, he's already been in all the trouble he's going to be in about that issue.

Now he's saying that while he's still attracted to teens, he now knows better than to act on it.

I'm not sure why you think he's in serious trouble now. Just because he lost however much $ it is to subscribe to the Reader?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]gal_montag
2005-02-14 04:01 am UTC (link)
Well, I inferred that the cops might still be investigating him.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-14 04:10 am UTC (link)
Nope. That whole business with the 14-year-old has been left behind. I mean obviously it will always be on his record, and he will always be in the registry, and they will both always be affected by what happened. But as far as the state, the penal system, and the cops are concerned, it's done with. Stagemanager did it, he's been punished for it, and now he can go on, as much as he can.

There is new stuff about the cops, however. This doesn't involve the 14-year-old, just stagemanager vs. SDMB. For a bit there, tubadiva was being all, I'm going to report you for trying to pick up more teenage boys on SDMB (paraphrased). Stagemanager wasn't sure what to believe (if it was an empty threat or if he would actually be in danger of that investigation). Stagemanager also kind of wanted to get back at tubadiva, first for kicking him off the boards (pain and suffering, plus the loss of however much he'd paid), and second for posting sensitive information about him publicly (more pain and suffering, harassment, breach of contract, etc.).

But the new games-with-cops don't involve anything to do with the 14-year-old, which stagemanager definitely isn't keeping secret or hidden.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-14 04:05 am UTC (link)
I think you're missing a fairly important bit. (The guy has me friended, which I've always felt a little weird about.)

In the original baleeted thread, stagemanager did admit to being a registered sex offender (sexually attracted to teenagers, convicted of l&l with a 14-year-old). He also offered, perhaps tongue-in-cheek and perhaps not, to start an "Ask the Sex Offender" thread.

Tubadiva flipped out about that -- saying in effect, don't you dare start that thread, you will just be attracting more sickos to SDMB.

Stagemanager didn't start that thread or any thread like that.

Nonetheless, Tubadiva broke out the banhammer because she was afraid he'd use SDMB to "troll" for more teenagers to pervert/seduce/whatever. It is worth noting that the 14-year-old that stagemanager hooked up with in the first place was not from, or involved with, SDMB, and that stagemanager never gave any indications of using SDMB to look for younger guys.

Stagemanager freely admits to the details of his l&l conviction with the 14-year-old. He acknowledges that he is attracted to teenage boys and always will be (he says that can't be changed anymore than his homosexuality can). However, he says that now he knows not to act on that desire anymore.

So. Hopefully that fills you in a bit more on some of what you missed.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-14 04:17 am UTC (link)
Of course I forgot stuff too.

http://www.livejournal.com/~stagemanager/115821.html?nc=19 , hideous style and all, is stagemanager's post about what happened with him and the 14-year-old and all of that.

If any of you have questions I'll try to answer them as best I can. I think I can see a bit more than you can.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]jetamors
2005-02-14 06:17 am UTC (link)
Ah, sorry. I did see that post, but I only had a vague awareness of the other stuff going on. I'll link your first post up top.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-14 11:49 pm UTC (link)
Squeakity squeak. We certainly do know everything.

(No, really, it's just me.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Anonymous)
2005-02-17 07:13 am UTC (link)
Eh, I think the 12 page thread of "Foodies" vs "Non-Foodies" is by far wankier than this mess. Not that this wasn't a beauty, but come one, there are people calling each other PUSSIES because they don't like olives in the current Foodies battle.

Good times, good times.

(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map