STEAMED about a blogger. Need input from Kerrycrats on this.

[_dynamicdems]

I'm livid about a blogger who posted about me.

Let me explain: I posted a reaction to this person in response to a negative post about John Kerry. My reply was submitted for the blog owner's approval, so I checked back to see if it was posted. (Many times they are not.)

This person did not post my comment, but instead posted about me and referred to personal information from my profile. While this information is in my profile, I think it was highly unethical for a blogger to post my gender, location, blogger name and to refer to a domain name I own.

I'm furious and I have contacted blogger.com about this and I've also flagged the blog.

Am I overreacting?



http://massmarrier.blogspot.com/2006/04/john-kerry-laggard.html


EDIT: he did post my comment on the original post, but he had no right to then go on and blog about me in his next post.

http://massmarrier.blogspot.com/2006/04/john-kerry-plays-god.html

[wisteria]

1. No, they did it with malicious intent. n/t

[globalvillage]

3. psssssst.

Check your pm. Can you go?

[_dynamicdems]

5. delete

[wisteria]

10. I just replied! n/t

[_dynamicdems]

4. Thanks...I was feeling a little sheepish after I sent a scathing e-mail to

Blogger.com. It did seem a little on the nasty side, but it was about me so I was a little sensitive and admittedly, I've got a tiny bit of a temper. :nuke: :blush:

[jenndar]

2. You are NOT overreacting.

That was horrible blogging etiquette. I wish I had some advice on how to deal with the S.O.B.

[karynnj]

6. No this is disgusting

especially as there is no way to publicly respond.

[_dynamicdems]

8. Well, I flagged the blog. And I contacted blogger.com.

Should I contact the blogger directly? He has an e-mail address listed. I was thinking of giving him a piece of my mind but maybe it is best to wait and see what Blogger.com does.

[_dynamicdems]

33. Thank you. I appreciate the support. n/t

[LittleClarkie]

7. Seems childish to talk about a comment that wasn't even

presented so that people could judge for themselves.

It's one thing to work for a journalistic internet publication and talk about one's mail. But if one is going to present a blog, then legitimate comments should be published.

And speculating on who you were as if it mattered seemed quite off as well.

How could she live in Mass. and seem surprised by Kerry's positions? How far to the left does she lean, for pete's sake.

Sounds like a lefty freeper to me.

[_dynamicdems]

9. My error: I looked back at the original post and my comment was posted.

However, it still wasn't right to blog about me personally. If he had rebutted my post, that is one thing, but to get personal and to pretty much "out me" for my views is what is pissing me off royally.

Here is the link to that post and my reply.

http://massmarrier.blogspot.com/2006/04/john-kerry-plays-god.html


EDIT: the Blogger is a "he."

[karynnj]

11. Your response seems fine

I think that it may be his problem - it also seems from his site that gay marriage is his main issue. This likely makes him unhappy with Kerry. Some people in this group dissagreed with his position here - part of the reason is that, I think it was misunderstood. It was not a call for mistreating the guy - just not giving him decades of therapy, which is costly, highly unlikely to cure him and (in Kerry's opinion) he deserves to be in jail till he dies.

I think your answer was absolutely on target. Kerry seems to refer to his years as a prosecutor at least monthly. He believes in accountability.

[_dynamicdems]

13. Opinions differ. I wasn't attacking the blogger, just defending John Kerry

I thought the same thing as you do: that he's on a crusade because he's miffed about the gay marriage issue. That's his problem. He's rude to say that the senator is "playing God" and he's really rude to behave the way he does when somebody disagrees with him.

[LittleClarkie]

15. Indeed.

I sent this to him for publishing:

"Might have been nice to include a link to the article in question. I'd rather read the thing for myself than have someone filter it for me, more than alittle snarkily I might add.

As for Kerry's liberal credentials, two thoughts:

1. How long have you lived in Massachusetts? Why would anything about your long-standing junior Senator surprise you? Hence, acting as if this is all a big surprise to you would seem to be somewhat disingenuous.

2. How liberal Sen. Kerry would seem to you depends mightily on how far to the left you're viewing him. I, for instance, live in a very Red County in a purple state. If a liberal is looking at me, I'm gonna look like a moderate. If an ultra conservative is looking at me, I'm going to look like a Communist.

The poor Senator gets accused of being both too liberal and too conservative. Maybe that makes him a moderate as well."

But it does appear that this person reacts badly to being disagreed with. And I stick by my "lefty freeper" analysis.

There's something disingenous about acting surprised about the liberal credentials of your own Senator. If anything is a surprise at this point, they weren't paying attention in the first place.

And I do hate that condescending comment about "excuses" from Kerry supporters. As if all that those who disagree with you have to offer is excuses. Rather like being called an apologist around here.

[_dynamicdems]

18. That is AWESOME!

Good for you! I love it! excerpts from articles)

"There's something disingenous about acting surprised about the liberal credentials of your own Senator. If anything is a surprise at this point, they weren't paying attention in the first place." :rofl:

:yourock: :patriot:

[LittleClarkie]

36. He printed my comment, saying something about

Kerry not bothering on alot of issues, and how that wasn't right. I see some of his talking points are Right Wing. He says that Kerry doesn't make alot of votes in the Senate when I KNOW he does when he's not running for president. But anyway, here was my rebuttal.

"Another thing that isn't right is someone who professes to being a Progressive using a Right Wing rag as their news sourch. It's amazing how the right and the left can manage to agree as long as the topic is Kerry."

[kerrygoddess]

12. Well...

It's not uncommon for a blogger to point to something in a comment on their blog and the user name of the person who posted it. If you don't want to take the chance that that info will posted on a blog after you comment somewhere, you should create a different login with Blogger to leave comments. Sadly it's the chance you take on the blogosphere when you disagree with a blog owner. Not everyone is ethical. You're lucky actually, I have worse done to me.

[_dynamicdems]

16. The information in my profile is not secret as the profile is public.

The issue is not about confidentiality. It is about the person being able to blog about an individual personally because that individual posted to their blog. I'm not a public figure and I think that this blogger crossed a line. I've lodged a complaint with Blogger.com and I intend to speak to a friend who is a lawyer. This might be a gray area, but I'm certain that Blogger.com will want to stay clear of any potential "issues" in addressing the matter.

If you have had worse done to you, I truly hope you addressed the issue. (Kicked ass.)

[kerrygoddess]

19. It's the same thing

As a blogger linking to a blog post on another blog and saying I disagree with "so and so blogger". Unless the post was edited, the blogger did not slander you, he only disagreed with you and pointed to who he was disagreeing with. It's part and parcel of the blogopshere. My suggestion of using a different username is if you don't want a blogger to publicly disagree with you in a way that can point directly to you, then use a different username that does not link back to your website.

Unless you can prove libel or slander or serious malicious intent I don't think there's not much that can be done about it.

I'm not unsympathetic to your feelings, this just happens to prevelent in the blogosphere and likewise even in the news. If you put your opinion out there publicly you risk having people disagree with you.

[_dynamicdems]

20. Annominity is not the point. It is not about remaining annonymous. IF it

were, then I'd not have a public profile. And be assurred, there is only information in there that I want in there.

The point is that there was no need to specifically target personal information about me in his post. That the information is public is not the point. I was posting about John Kerry. My post was not about being a woman from New Hampshire with the domain name DynamicDems.com. (You see, the public aspect of my information is not the issue.)

For example: let's say this individual had in his profile that he is gay. Were the situation reversed, it would not be considered appropriate for me to post "JoeSmith, a gay man from DesMoines, who owns the domain BlahBlahBlah said..."

I disagree with you that there isn't much that can be done about it. I've already flagged the site for Blogger to look at and have contacted them asking that this reference to my personal information be removed. I've encountered this type of thing on a Yahoo board before and it was immediately removed. The same principle is involved and Blogger is probably very much like Yahoo in that they prefer to err on the side of caution.

edit: there is also an implicit threat in the mentioning that I am female and live in NH. It also references that I own a domain name. In many cases, domain name owners do not protect their identities. The veiled threat is that: if you don't like what she has to say, here she is folks.

[kerrygoddess]

24. If you have a public profile

it's assumed that you are okay with people knowing who you are. Some bloggers blog annonymously and some do not. I own 3 domains, and have been on the internet for 7 years. It is an annonimity issue if you are worried about what you are stating you are worried about.

[_dynamicdems]

25. You are still missing the point. It is not about knowing who I am.

It is about being targeted personally. The key word here is targeted. There was no reason to make a post pointing to my gender. There was no reason to state that I live in NH. There was no reason to post that I own a domain name. It was out of line. Period.

[kerrygoddess]

27. I'm not missing the point

I'm saying to bloggers frequently say things about other bloggers and the only way to protect yourself is to make that information PRIVATE, if you don't want someone sharing it. It's not your real name, it's not your town, or street address. I've had this happen to me, there is not muchyou can do, if you make the info public.

Was what happened tacky, yes, but that's the blogosphere in many regards. And sorry, yes, bloggers link to other bloggers domain names every day. As Sandnsea said that's how you get known as blogger. If you don't want people to link to your domain or mention it, hide the information. It's not out of line to post the name of someone's domain. That is the least out of line thing the blogger did.

Honestly again, I will reiterate, I have had worse than this happen to me, so has Sandnsea and many other bloggers. That's why people hide their info, if they have these concerns.

[_dynamicdems]

29. I do not agree and I fully intend to pursue this.

If you decided not to take any action when "worse" was done to you, that is your choice. My choice is to contact Blogger and to escalate it from there if I do not receive a satisfactory response.

Again, it is not about linking to a site or referring to a site in a legitimate context. The point made by the blogger was that I owned a domain and this was referenced along with other bits of information that the blogger believed would identify me. There was an implicit threat in the post and that needs to be addressed regardless of what I put in my profile (or even if what I put in my profile is true). This behavior is not acceptable and I'm sorry but I do not subscribe to the notion that the blogosphere is some sort of "Wild West" where anything goes.

While it is understandable, from a blogger perspective, that anything goes (or should)in the name of free speech, Internet speech is increasingly being governed by the same rules that apply offline. I'm sorry that worse has been done to you, but what was okay yesterday or even today will probably not be okay tomorrow. For example, it used to be common practice for employers to make lewd comments to female employees. This is no longer tolerated. I'm pursuing the issue of this blogger because I think a line was crossed that should not have been.

[kerrygoddess]

30. In the blogosphere

People WANT their domain names mentioned. That is the point. Sandnsea said the same thing. He did not link to your blog, he did not say anthing inflammatory about you, your real name is not involved, no contact info.

I'm sorry, again I get that you are upset, but bloggers mention other blogs and domain names all the time. People like myself who do not blog annonymously, as you do, have our names put out all over the blogosphere. It happens. Bloggers expect that to happen. Many of us blog under our real names because we are proud of what we are doing and expect to get recognized for it, as well as have people publicly disagree with us using our names and pointing to our websites or blogs.

Calling you a woman is not a lewd comment, if you blogged under your real name it would be known what gender you are. It's a very thin gray line that this blogger crossed, and honestly if you put your info out there, you have to expect that people will do this. Is it right? No. Best way to protect yourself is to be annonymous or expect people to disagree with you publicly sometimes and refer to you. Good luck.

[_dynamicdems]

32. You are making a point about an entirely different subject. This is not

about my blog or domain being mentioned. It is not about my gender. It is about the way in which he presented information in a POST about ME. It implied a threat. If he had posted under the comment which I made and referenced my Web site, the context would have been on the subject of the post and not on me personally and would not have carried with the implication of THREAT.

[kerrygoddess]

34. As a woman

If I were concerned with someone exposing that I am a woman online, I would hide that infor if I blogged annonymously. That's my point - you made the info available. I'm trying to be helpful, but you'd rather argue. Again Good luck.

[_dynamicdems]

35. That is not the point I was making.

It is not that I am worried about anyone "exposing" anything. I have a public profile. I also go out in public on occasion, where this information is there for all to see. As for anonymity, unless you have met me personally, you cannot say for certain whether or not I am actually a man named Joe who digs ditches in Idaho.

The issue is not about my profile. It is not about the validity of it. The issue is about the Blogger's attempt to doing something unethical and possibly threatening. This is the kind of behavior that should be unacceptable online. Period.

He shouldn't be allowed to blog about a private individual using what he believes is information that will identify that individual. The validity of the information is not the point.

For example, police often target child molesters by using fake profiles. The fact that the molester believes the police officer to be a child is enough to expose malicious intent.

This is all about intention and about being able to target someone. You think this is fine. Well, you may have reasons for that opinion that have to do with online freedom. You have a right to your opinion. My opinion; however, is that freedom should not interfere with the rights of others, which is why we have laws. This is why most serious sites have guidelines. I complained to Blogger because I think this individual was out of line.

[sandnsea]

21. That kind of is how it works

Most people want to get their blog linked, and a name mention as well. It happens from disagreement as often as agreement, all publicity is good sort of thing. Maybe they took some stuff out because all I saw was dynamicdems, and maybe from New Hampshire. Not too bad, really. I actually had Free Republic hunting me down at one point back in 2004, lol, so stupid. Another time, I got a psycho fundie letter after an LTTE got published. That's when I decided there was no point in trying to hide from these kooks. As long as they don't publish your name and phone number, that sort of thing, not sure there's much to complain about. It'll be interesting to see what your lawyer friend says though, because I think there will be more of this crossing the line as the freeps feel more threatened.

[_dynamicdems]

22. He'll probably advise me what he did with the Yahoo board where I had

a similar problem: to take it up with the administration. If they didn't respond positively, he said he'd give them a friendly but persuasive e-mail. It is a legal gray area but most sites are careful about this sort of thing. Yahoo advised me to contact the administrator and have them remove the post and to contact them again if the post was not removed. The post was removed and I thanked Yahoo. That post only referred to my domain names but this blog post singles me out as female and by my location. That implies a threat, if veiled, so I'd be interested in his perspective on that from a legal POV.

[kerrygoddess]

23. Again...

I would stress if you don't want people to know this information - DO NOT post it in your profile or anywhere.

It's a common practice in the blogosphere to reference people you respond to or bloggers who post something. Case in point, recently Hotline's Blogometer linked to something I wrote and posted my name and my blog's name. It's what bloggers do. The only thing you can do to stop people from posting your name or user name or perhaps what state you live in is to not make that info available.

[_dynamicdems]

26. Again, you are missing the point. n/t

[kerrygoddess]

28. I'm sorry you feel that way

You could telll me that if I was clueless about the blogosphere - but I'm not. I'm sorry you are upset about this but I am trying to help you to understand how the blogosphere works and what you can do if you don't want this to happen again.

Otherwise, a blogger disagreed with you about JK. It bothered you that he noted your comment. YOu can't win everyone over and you have expect to have people publicly disagree with you.

[_dynamicdems]

31. I was speaking literally, not being derogative.

You are certainly well-versed in the blogosphere and you have no doubt had some very unpleasant experiences.

While this kind of behavior may be common in the blogosphere, and while it may also be common practice to put up with it, I am not disposed to going along with the notion that it is acceptable.

And you are honestly not getting my point if you think this has anything to do with opinions expressed in either this blogger's post or mine. That is a whole other issue. My comments have been noted and attacked my better and smarter bloggers than this one. This started about John Kerry and I would have been perfectly happy to have kept it about John Kerry.

This individual crossed the line because he referenced me personally with malicious intent and a thinly veiled threat. I take exception to that.

The information in my profile is no more and no less than I am comfortable with people reading. And people are welcome to read it any old time they like. They are not; however, welcome to threaten me or to target me in any way that implies a threat.

[ProSense]

14. First of all the rankings

are BS, so his argument sucks..

Menendez, Obama, Clinton, Schumer, Dodd and Rockefeller are more progressive than Kerry in fantasy world.

[_dynamicdems]

17. He's full of shit and he knows it, so he's the one who is playing God

IMHO.

[benny05]

37. Who is this Guy?

(Meaning the creator of massmarrior) Surprised...thought the Kerrycrats had the ball rollin' in MA. I guess he disagrees. Is he a Mitt fan?

Sorry I will miss the Kerry speech and live bloggin' (sounds like a great event), but I will catch up with you all here. I just got back from out of town and have errands to do at that time.

Cheers, and I bet Kerry will do very well and rock the place.

Benny