Some notes on confidentiality law.... In professions where it is required to keep confidentiality such as psychology, the practitioner is supposed to keep their mouth shut. Unless their client shows intent to harm either another person or themselves. In which case the professional is REQUIRED to report, both to the authorities and to potential victims.
i feel that the post regarding the identity of this person was under such bounds.
Especially since knoxgothic is not under any legal guidelines as far as confidentiality. (at least that i know of) So, i would think that if it's ok and in fact expected to talk about such things where there is confidentiality law that applies, that anyone trying to sue over any defamation of character over such a matter would have little ground to stand on., especially since it had been reported to the police. Even though no action was taken, that can still be used as evidence of the event occuring. Of course they still could sue, but anyone bored enough can sue over anything. Hell, someone could decide to sue knoxgothic because the purple background color caused undue eye-strain and led to them wearing glasses. They'd be laughed out of the court-room, but they Could.
Of course it's entirely possible i'm just being overly touchy since i'm dealing with my own psycho stalker type at the moment.

Celestial Dung wrote:If it hasn't been done already this person should be reported to the police with as many witnesses going along as possible.

And during the club nights point out the guy and say "He's done this and this stay away from him."

I don't know how easy or hard it would be to sue Knoxgothic over accusatiosn made on a public board. Until we know for certain it's probably best to keep the names off accusations.

The police would be pointless right now since this occurred a year and a half ago.

The reason I made the original post was because a few weeks ago this person showed up at Asylum a few weeks ago(and I was informed that he showed up previous to that particular night). I know for a fact that he had followed my friend(female) there. When she gave him the brush off, he began to try to start conversations and such with other females. As I said, he appeared completely harmless and sweet. A female that is single or in a poly-relationship might very well fall for it. Call me stupid, but I did. Doc is a very quick judge of whether a person is slimey or not and he didn't get the first bad vibe from him.

I would love for him to try and refute what I'm saying, but, that night at Asylum, when he seen me whispering in the ears of the females he had been talking to, he made a bee-line for the door.

DarkVader wrote:

ibbie wrote:disclaimers are a good thing. i was wondering why KG didn't have one, already.

We do have one. You agreed to it when you signed up for the forum. It's probably even legal, and would probably be a valid defense if we are sued.

i know about the registration disclaimer, but what about non-member surfers? some kind of "if you find yadda-yadda offensive, please go elsewhere" lawyer-spak.

you're right in that nothing can keep you from being sued - stupid as it is, america is the land of the greed, and one can sue someone for anything.. except perhaps being stupid. if this last were different, i'd be buying everyone's drinks.

however a large number of people who consider filing suit think twice after seeing a hefty, cover-all-bases disclaimer displayed before entering a site.

I really hate to bring this up, but what if this guy actually hurts someone in this group?

How important would a lawsuit be then?

What if he hurts someone in the group? Then we hurt him really really really bad...
'Nuff said.

Pan131 wrote::twisted:
What if he hurts someone in the group? Then we hurt him really really really bad...
'Nuff said.

*Nexxus23 puts on her best Brooklyn accent*

I knows a coupla guys, they could, you know, take care a tings for ya. You want, I'll call. Faget about it.

Nexxus23 wrote:*Nexxus23 puts on her best Brooklyn accent*

I knows a coupla guys, they could, you know, take care a tings for ya. You want, I'll call. Faget about it.

Ya want we should bend em a little before we break em boss?

iblis wrote:

The Stormstress wrote:

vertigo25 wrote:See... the thing is, making accusations in a public forum, even if those accusations are 100% true,...

The Stormstress wrote:Once again, law overpowers reason!

it's completely reasonable. while it does suck in this situation, it also stops people from spreading false information about you in a similar fashion.

sometimes these laws of ours are double edged swords, but they're kind of handy at times, too.

Interesting opinion, but I still disagree... Justice and reason r based on situational issues, not broad generalities made up by some schmuck long b4 the issue at hand! N this case, the law only protects the guilty party... where's the reason n that?!!!

Nexxus23 wrote:

Pan131 wrote::twisted:
What if he hurts someone in the group? Then we hurt him really really really bad...
'Nuff said.

*Nexxus23 puts on her best Brooklyn accent*

I knows a coupla guys, they could, you know, take care a tings for ya. You want, I'll call. Faget about it.

Guys if we're going to deal with this problem in this manner we just need to do it Boondock Saint style.

[quote="DarkVader]
We do have one. You agreed to it when you signed up for the forum. It's probably even legal.........[/quote]


For some reason, this is just so funny to me.

Pan131 wrote::twisted:
What if he hurts someone in the group? Then we hurt him really really really bad...
'Nuff said.

i was trying to avoid this line of thought.

partly because talking about mangling someone on a forum which obviously records and stores information of n number of years isn't my idea of safe conversation.

and partly because, well, what you've mentioned above should be blatantly obvious. after all, this isn't KnoxDirtyStinkyHippie.com. (: