The Aftermath....

[Almost38]

http://www.ip-adress.com/ thats what i used to to get his ip from his site so yes we used his site to get his address dont u not understand that?we never did anything illegal

[Juliette]

Sigh.. same thing as people accuse me of.. you don't know when to stop.
But do present your arguments better, if you're staying around as well. It helps.

[Almost38]

btw auriel jay-z rocks;)

[Mr Nice Guy]

and then this went from one point to absolutly NOTHING.... and i wonder, where are the mods now ?????

[Almost38]

this thread was to make fun of all the banned people till they returned which we have an ow1 every1 just shutsup

[semper]

this thread was to make fun of all the banned people till they returned which we have an ow1 every1 just shutsup

no it was not.

This thread was to discuss the prank.

[Almost38]

that lasted about 1 post

[semper]

No it did not. The people who did the prank are part of it. Ergo it has lasted really up until maybe page 20, I cba reading it all..

[yue strike]

Almost38, what part of you using other sites to spy on Clarkey's website do you not get? Where did I say what you were did was illegal to obtain the information? Posting said info was wrong, hopefully against this forum's policy, but at least against any morales most people have online. Unless you went ON Clarkey's website to get the information, literally looking at the webpage, you did not get the info from his site. You got the information from his server.

[HairyMehoff]

Who cares anyways. I thought this was about the prank?

[Wolf359]

Well, it seems some people can't contain themselves or just simply disregard mod requests. This is all getting personal again and off the topic - which was to discuss the 'prank' and not continue to make accusations.

Clarkey's info was in the public domain and nothing illegal, as far as I can determine, was done to obtain it. Whether that means it should have been posted here is another matter - personally I think it was was bad judgement to do so, although having just briefly (so I may have missed something) gone through the forum rules, it does not appear to be in breach - something that will be rectified ASAP.

In the meantime I strongly suggest 2 things:

1 - that nobody posts any further personally identifiable information on the forum - consider this a pre-warning of a rule amendment and as such a warning that if this suggestion is ignored, it will be dealt with accordingly.

2 - that accusations and argumnents of illegalities cease immediately. Both sides are not going to be swayed from the viewpoint, which has been expressed several times now, so I don't think we need going over old ground.

I don't want to have to lock this - at least not yet - but I will if the above points are ignored (and if it is locked, any further topics on the subject will be deleted as soon as they are found).

There are people looking into this to try and establish exactly what took place, nad by whom.

[HairyMehoff]

a pre-warning of a rule amendment.....




L
M
F
A
O

[Wolf359]

a pre-warning of a rule amendment.....




L
M
F
A
O

I'm glad you're amused - but I really don't expect that sort of response to a mod's post.

The pre-warning was to inform people that wording of a rule amendment is in progress - necessary because we need to look into a number of legalities about personally identifiable information being distributed by anybody other than who the person is about - and to warn that if anyone posts any post with personally identifiable information before the rule is implemented, they will be dealt with accordingly - I think that was quite clear.

[HairyMehoff]

well im not posting anybodys personally identifiable info, im just laughing.
L
M
F
A
O


I hope this prank gets an award at the end of the year .... phew

[Curumo]

Wolf359 <-

Congratz to one of the best posts in a long time! It would do well if people would pay heed to this advice!!