Support NeoGAF

[-viper-]

Can someone show me a screencap of the guy's Live biography that everyone seems to be talking about? I can't see it since I don't have an XBL account.

 

[Atilac]

So now that we have his GT, what do we collectively?

post it on 4chan?

 

[Vinci]

Well for one, isn't that after the person either admits guilt or is convicted?

Two, people don't have a vigilante/lynch mob mentality towards traffic ticket violators. If we heard the other guy's side of the story, and had proof that everything the OP says is correct, then that would be different. But come on, look at the big picture. All we have is the OP's word and the other guy isn't even here to give his side of it. Lynch mob mentality for the win, huh?

What if others on here were to contact the guy for a game of UNO to see if, in fact, he did behave in the same manner? My point is, there are other options beyond ostracizing the guy. Besides, I doubt he depends heavily on the GAF posting population for his UNO fetish.

 

[Baryn]

I am not supporting porn guy, but don't expect anyone online to give a fuck what your child sees. The fact that you do robs you of any sympathy.

Parents should not have special excuse in society. Except for my mom.

 

[dionusos]

What if others on here were to contact the guy for a game of UNO to see if, in fact, he did behave in the same manner? My point is, there are other options beyond ostracizing the guy. Besides, I doubt he depends heavily on the GAF posting population for his UNO fetish.

Based on the responses in this thread, in no way can you reasonably argue that people were wanting his gamertag to try to confirm what happened. They all assumed that he was guilty.

 

[speculawyer]

what would the charge for 'showing porn to a three year old over a webcam'
be?

Corruption of a minor? It would be some random state law.

What that guy did was stupid. However, showing a 3 yearold the camera version of xbox live is like taking her to a brothel and being surprised and disgusted at what you find.

What? Yeah, I'm sure Bill Gates would love to hear Xbox live described as a brothel.

Look I set up an open xbox live game on an 'E-rated' game for 5 minutes just to show my sister how UNO works and you can play with others. I don't think it is fair for me to expect someone to immediately join the game and violate the terms of his xbox live account agreement by posting porn. That's like saying a woman wearing a cute dress who got raped 'deserved it because of the way she dressed.'.

Edit: Let me put it another way . . . if I brought my daughter into a big city like New York, London, or San Francisco and I was walking along the sidewalk and some guy walks up to us and shoves a porn magazine in our face . . . would you blame me for bringing my daughter to the city? Do I have to confine me daughter to the house?

I don't mind there being porn on the internet . . . but to fire up a child's card game on a game network and be subjected to it just isn't right. I don't blame Microsoft . . . actually I applaud the controls that they offer. It is more a statement as to the lack of basic civility of people. There are lots of PC applications out there that allow adults to expose themselves to each other. Go use them if that is what you want. There is no need to join an open children's card game and expose the other players to porn.

 

[Vinci]

Based on the responses in this thread, in no way can you reasonably argue that people were wanting his gamertag to try to confirm what happened. They all assumed that he was guilty.

GAF tends to trust people who've been posting here a while? Is that particularly surprising? I don't know speculawyer personally but I've seen him around enough to feel he wouldn't make up something like this for shits and giggles.

 

[speculawyer]

uhhh you can't post people's personal info on GAF and you definitely can't post racial slurs on GAF. nicely done.

A person's xbox live bio is not 'personal' information . . . the person is intentionally making it publicly available.

 

[dionusos]

GAF tends to trust people who've been posting here a while? Is that particularly surprising? I don't know speculawyer personally but I've seen him around enough to feel he wouldn't make up something like this for shits and giggles.

So you do admit that they were not intending on confirming guilt, but rather, they had a lynch mob mentality? It seems you went from suggesting that the gamertag was wanted for confirmation purposes to defending the act of assuming guilt.

 

[bluemax]

I think I saw this episode of Dr. Phil already. Someone change the channel.

 

[speculawyer]

A while back, a friend of mine's parents got married. Their house is pretty much a mansion, so when they went on their honeymoon, all of us lads moved in - about 12 of us. Enough space for everyone to sleep and stuff. The house was big enough that we played skirmish Counter-Strike style Terrorist vs Counter Terrorist games with airsoft guns. It was the greatest 4 weeks ever.

The living room was turned into a massive gaming room. 3 360s, 2 Wiis, 1 PS3, a spare TV for TVs, and 5 LAN'd Command & Conquer 3 PCs. It was badass. Everything is Live Enabled.

Anyway, so while we were all living there the girlfriends were visiting in order to give disapproving shakes of the head at the state of the house and whatnot and also of course to see their boyfriends. My mate's poor girlfriend once played Uno on Xbox Live with the camera on while we were all out at the store on a beer run.

She didn't know the camera was on, and amazed when one of the guys she was playing with sent her a message saying "Nice tits", then another saying "Take a look". The guy was lying in bed, took of his pants and just started masturbating. Best of all, he was still fucking playing the game, controller in one hand, penis in the other. Credit to her, she carried on playing until we got back so we could all laugh at him. We all ran in front of the camera and dropped our trousers. The sudden appearance of a collection of man meat as opposed to the big-breasted blonde meant instant boner loss for him, I'm sure. Even after this though he persisted in adding the account sending slightly scary sexual messages it..

 

[CrunchinJelly]

Video is set to Friends-only by default.

OP should have changed it before letting a minor near the console.

 

[speculawyer]

http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/form...phy-whilst-playing-xbox-live-uno-$1262177.htm

:lol

Some guy wrote an article about my experience? :lol

The sad thing is that I'm sure this kind of thing happens all the time. (as the story I quote above attests to.)

 

[speculawyer]

Video is set to Friends-only by default.

OP should have changed it before letting a minor near the console.

Hmm . . . maybe my sister didn't see anything then. I haven't talked to her about this yet. I'll have to ask her.

 

[Baryn]

I set up an open xbox live game on an 'E-rated' game

"Game experience may change during play"

 

[Vinci]

So you do admit that they were not intending on confirming guilt, but rather, they had a lynch mob mentality? It seems you went from suggesting that the gamertag was wanted for confirmation purposes to defending the act of assuming guilt.

I'm suggesting that anything could happen. Some people here aren't massive dicks and will try to confirm what speculawyer is saying. GAFfers tend to be a bit more thorough than other people on forums. [Sales Age is a good indication of this.] Others will, yes, sadly try to figure out some way to hassle this guy.

I'm saying that speculawyer is one of us and thus gets some credence placed upon his word: That doesn't suddenly make us all sheep following his every comment. So what I'm suggesting is that my comment about people trying to confirm these antics is just as likely to happen as your 'lynch mob.' Either could happen. Neither could.

 

[Danthrax]

A person's xbox live bio is not 'personal' information . . . the person is intentionally making it publicly available.

Well profiles on MySpace and Facebook are publicly available as well. And if I got this guy's name, I could look him up on Intelius and find every city he's ever lived in as well as the names of his relatives and their info — all of it is publicly available. But we're not supposed to post people's information like that on GAF when the intent is to ruin his life. At least, that's my understanding of the TOS.

 

[dionusos]

I'm suggesting that anything could happen. Some people here aren't massive dicks and will try to confirm what speculawyer is saying. GAFfers tend to be a bit more thorough than other people on forums. [Sales Age is a good indication of this.] Others will, yes, sadly try to figure out some way to hassle this guy.

I'm saying that speculawyer is one of us and thus gets some credence placed upon his word: That doesn't suddenly make us all sheep following his every comment. So what I'm suggesting is that my comment about people trying to confirm these antics is just as likely to happen as your 'lynch mob.' Either could happen. Neither could.

Well then my point stands, because if there is a possibility of lynch-mob mentality then gamertags shouldn't be posted for that reason. If you ask what the problem with posting gamertags is, that is the answer. There are people out there that will have a lynch-mob mentality and try to hassle him with no proof. The fact that some people will be more reasonable doesn't negate the existence of the hasslers.

 

[speculawyer]

"Game experience may change during play"

A bit of an understatement. :lol

 

[Seth C]

Nice to see GAF acting like 4chan in this topic.

To the TC, I'm sorry that happened to you but releasing his GT like that was immature.

Bullshit. Had this character done this in person he would potentially be facing a prison sentence. He's lucky he is only having his gamertag released.

 

[Vinci]

Well then my point stands, because if there is a possibility of lynch-mob mentality then gamertags shouldn't be posted for that reason. If you ask what the problem with posting gamertags is, that is the answer. There are people out there that will have a lynch-mob mentality and try to hassle him with no proof. The fact that some people will be more reasonable doesn't negate the existence of the hasslers.

Honestly, I doubt anything will happen. Just don't see people on here being so needlessly active on this. He's gonna get banned if there's a shred of proof of this.

Most people in here are like, "Yeah, you should've known better," giving me the impression that they know this sort of thing happens and frankly don't care.

 

[dionusos]

Honestly, I doubt anything will happen. Just don't see people on here being so needlessly active on this. He's gonna get banned if there's a shred of proof of this.

Most people in here are like, "Yeah, you should've known better," giving me the impression that they know this sort of thing happens and frankly don't care.

If that's true, then posting his gamertag had no purpose.

If that is not true, then posting his gamertag was a mistake.

Thus, gamertags should not be posted.

 

[Dunlop]

When I played Warhammer Online, we routinely would report anyone on forums for that particular server so others could immediately set them to ignore or know to watch out for them in scenario matches. What's the difference? The guy is openly sharing this with the public; if there are members of the public who would prefer not to see this, knowing his gamertag could prove beneficial depending on how long it takes MS to ban him.

I was posting that this is probably why Gaf frowns upon it. In this instance, as I have 2 very young children I would nail this guys ass to the wall. I hope everyone makes LIVE unplayable for him.

 

[Vinci]

If that's true, then posting his gamertag had no purpose.

If that is not true, then posting his gamertag was a mistake.

Thus, gamertags should not be posted.

Said this earlier:

When I played Warhammer Online, we routinely would report anyone on forums for that particular server so others could immediately set them to ignore or know to watch out for them in scenario matches. What's the difference? The guy is openly sharing this with the public; if there are members of the public who would prefer not to see this, knowing his gamertag could prove beneficial depending on how long it takes MS to ban him.

This is the purpose.

 

[dionusos]

Said this earlier:



This is the purpose.

I was referring to your implication that nothing will happen. If that is true that nothing will happen, then there was no purpose.

But the point is that doing that without any proof other than the OP's words is problematic. The fact that you/others did this on another forum without proof doesn't make it right.

 

[Vinci]

The fact that you/others did this on another forum without proof doesn't make it right.

Usually what happened is that others would later confirm that, yes, so-and-so was doing that and that people should definitely ignore him / pay attention to his antics. This happened almost 85% of the time, I'd say.

What I'm advocating is giving people the option to take precautions given they hear someone has done something in the past and might very well do it again. I'm not saying anything is necessarily right. What I'm suggesting is that it's not wrong to warn people about a person doing something in some form of the public arena that they might not want to see / their children to see / their tween girls to see, etc.

Taking precautions is not the same as a lynch mob.

 

[Aske]

Your source actually provides evidence that unwarranted exposure is harmful and is mainly decrying the lack of research on the matter.

"On the other hand, there are findings from the study that do bolster
concern about harm: the ones showing that one quarter of those ex-
posed said they were very or extremely upset and one fifth had some
apparent stress symptoms that they connected to the episode."

Your quote starts with the words "on the other hand". Way to post one side of the study's conclusion. I'm not going to quote the whole thing again because the study itself is largely inconclusive. It begins by lamenting the lack of evidence on the subject, and ends with much the same sentiments. As I said in a follow up post, the study found 6% of children were 'distressed', but the researchers go on to say that they have no way to couch the distress level in context: is it comparable to abuse, or to a bad grade, etc. They conclude that their work can be interpreted either way: some children are distressed, porn exposure does harm; or remarkably few children are distressed and suffer no obvious trauma, porn exposure does no real harm.

My source decries lack of research on the matter and then brings little else to the table; thus supporting my original argument that no conclusive evidence for genuine harm exists either way.

Plus the study references children no younger than 10 years old.

...Which further confirms the reason I quoted the study in the first place: no real evidence exists that shows porn conclusively harms young children; which was the bullet point of the "read any study, it's obvious, get a clue" post I was replying to.

My original point was not "children are not distressed by porn, ever". It was simply that people overreact when it comes to sexuality without logical cause (see Mike B's posts), and more children are more likely to be 'harmed' by watching a violent or scare-mongering news reel.

 

[dionusos]

Usually what happened is that others would later confirm that, yes, so-and-so was doing that and that people should definitely ignore him / pay attention to his antics. This happened almost 85% of the time, I'd say.

What I'm advocating is giving people the option to take precautions given they hear someone has done something in the past and might very well do it again. I'm not saying anything is necessarily right. What I'm suggesting is that it's not wrong to warn people about a person doing something in some form of the public arena that they might not want to see / their children to see / their tween girls to see, etc.

Taking precautions is not the same as a lynch mob.

But going by the reactions on here, there were a lot of people who seemed ready for lynch-mob behavior. If the reaction on the other forum was mostly controlled and reasonable, then it's not comparable. A lot of people on here saw the part about the 3 year old, got angry, and mentally skipped the entire process of confirming guilt.

 

[Vinci]

But going by the reactions on here, there were a lot of people who seemed ready for lynch-mob behavior. If the reaction on the other forum was mostly controlled and reasonable, then it's not comparable. A lot of people on here saw the part about the 3 year old, got angry, and mentally skipped the entire process of confirming guilt.

Fair enough. Personally, I see value in releasing his gamertag since it would allow me to put him on ignore and not take the chance that someone using my system - if I still had a 360 - would be forced to witness his nonsense. Ignoring him isn't going to cut into my enjoyment, nor his, in any way.

 

[speculawyer]

OP's view of lynch mob.

I have not reported the guy to the police nor will I. I don't want a lynch mob formed either.

However, if other people played games (or play games in the future) with him and encounter other such ToS violations, I'd certainly like it if those people reported the violations so Microsoft gets enough complaints to ban his account.

I just want people to enforce some reasonable degree of civility. I don't care if people swear like sailors on 'M' rated shooters. But joining an open E-rated children's card game and putting up porn when you full well know there are children playing? That is just not acceptable behavior.

I've had some great experiences playing online with my daughter around. I've been playing Little Big Planet and have had lots of fun. My daughter loves sackboy and has had fun talking to other sackboy characters online. (The voices of other players come through my speakers and my daughter's voice is picked up by the microphone on the PS3 camera.) It would be a shame if I had to completely stop playing online games due to an overabundance of cretins online.

 

[pizzapizza64]

OP's view of lynch mob.

I have not reported the guy to the police nor will I. I don't want a lynch mob formed either.

However, if other people played games (or play games in the future) with him and encounter other such ToS violations, I'd certainly like it if those people reported the violations so Microsoft gets enough complaints to ban his account.

I just want people to enforce some reasonable degree of civility. I don't care if people swear like sailors on 'M' rated shooters. But joining an open E-rated children's card game and putting up porn when you full well know there are children playing? That is just not acceptable behavior.

I've had some great experiences playing online with my daughter around. I've been playing Little Big Planet and have had lots of fun. My daughter loves sackboy and has had fun talking to other sackboy characters online. (The voices of other players come through my speakers and my daughter's voice is picked up by the microphone on the PS3 camera.) It would be a shame if I had to completely stop playing online games due to an overabundance of cretins online.

I am completely with you.
I feel like the online generation is a bit out of touch with what you legally can and cannot do.
Just because you have ACCESS to pornography doesn't mean that you have the legal right to show it to someone who did not willingly choose to see it.

The same person wouldn't do it in a pizza place, nor would he/she yell racist/homphobic slurs (most likely).

I don't understand the people who think it's okay to be a total tool online.

 

[dionusos]

Fair enough. Personally, I see value in releasing his gamertag since it would allow me to put him on ignore and not take the chance that someone using my system - if I still had a 360 - would be forced to witness his nonsense. Ignoring him isn't going to cut into my enjoyment, nor his, in any way.

Yeah, there's value in it (if he's guilty). It's just also risky in case he's not. For all we know, his side of the story could be any of the following:

1) I was on UNO and this guy was on there with his 3 year old daughter. As it turns out, another player in the game was his sister. They were totally trying to help each other out and beat me, but I won anyway. The guy wasn't so happy and cursed at me. Then he threatened to go online and post lies about me, that I did obscene things or something. Whatever.

2) I was on UNO with my friend. Also this guy and his 3 year old daughter was on there, with his sister. Anyway, I always play my favorite scene from '300' as part of a game ritual when I'm gaming. The scene represents my competitiveness. Well two gamers logged off immediately. My friend was laughing. I asked him what was so funny, and he told me that the resolution is so poor and the sound is so poor, that it looked like porn. It was actually a bunch of almost-naked Spartan guys battling it out, but he said it looked and sounded like they were humping. Yikes, I hope the other two players didn't think it was porn. I always try to be polite and considerate to my fellow gamers.

3) I logged onto UNO last night, and then immediately heard my 1 year old son crying. I left to go take care of him. When I came back, I found that my 7 year old cousin was playing porn into the camera! God, I hate that little rat! Anyway, I tried to apologize to the other gamers but they had already logged off.

 

[-tetsuo-]

the very first time i hooked my camera and played uno, there was one regular guy there, a dude jacking off and a hispanic man with an AK-47 in his lap. it was hilarious.

 

[Lince]

Yeah, there's value in it (if he's guilty). It's just also risky in case he's not. For all we know, his side of the story could be any of the following:

1) I was on UNO and this guy was on there with his 3 year old daughter. As it turns out, another player in the game was his sister. They were totally trying to help each other out and beat me, but I won anyway. The guy wasn't so happy and cursed at me. Then he threatened to go online and post lies about me, that I did obscene things or something. Whatever.

2) I was on UNO with my friend. Also this guy and his 3 year old daughter was on there, with his sister. Anyway, I always play my favorite scene from '300' as part of a game ritual when I'm gaming. The scene represents my competitiveness. Well two gamers logged off immediately. My friend was laughing. I asked him what was so funny, and he told me that the resolution is so poor and the sound is so poor, that it looked like porn. It was actually a bunch of almost-naked Spartan guys battling it out, but he said it looked and sounded like they were humping. Yikes, I hope the other two players didn't think it was porn. I always try to be polite and considerate to my fellow gamers.

3) I logged onto UNO last night, and then immediately heard my 1 year old son crying. I left to go take care of him. When I came back, I found that my 7 year old cousin was playing porn into the camera! God, I hate that little rat! Anyway, I tried to apologize to the other gamers but they had already logged off.

human nature says none of the above, the guy just run porn on his camera.

 

[Vinci]

Yes, dionusos, anything remotely conceivable could've happened, but again - my putting his account on ignore has no negative bearing on my gaming, nor his. Besides, I've played on Live. There are a LOT of assholes using that service, so I find any of those stories to be a little unlikely. In other words, I'd be playing the odds - I lose nothing from putting him on ignore and might be saving myself some annoyance in the future.

 

[dionusos]

human nature says none of the above, the guy just run porn on his camera.

More like, human nature says assume people are guilty based on hear-say.

 

[FF_VIII]

What kind of porn was it? I'm tempted to play Uno.

 

[dionusos]

Yes, dionusos, anything remotely conceivable could've happened, but again - my putting his account on ignore has no negative bearing on my gaming, nor his. Besides, I've played on Live. There are a LOT of assholes using that service, so I find any of those stories to be a little unlikely. In other words, I'd be playing the odds - I lose nothing from putting him on ignore and might be saving myself some annoyance in the future.

But like I said, based on responses here, it doesn't look like everyone was going to do the exact same thing you were going to do. Some have already tried looking up as much info about him as they can.

 

[Vinci]

But like I said, based on responses here, it doesn't look like everyone was going to do the exact same thing you were going to do. Some have already tried looking up as much info about him as they can.

So it's better to assume the best of a random Live user and give him the opportunity to offend many others rather than give them the means to proactively take precautions? Again, I've been on the service; I've experienced the sort of people that frequent it. Unless you're playing with people you know who aren't douches, you are ordinarily overwhelmed by them. That's been my experience. So I have no doubt about what speculawyer stated and feel less inclined to imagine some scenario in which the guy is 'oh gosh, never meant that to happen' 'cause I've come across similar things on the service from people who clearly intended to pull what is essentially a goatse on others.

 

[dionusos]

So it's better to assume the best of a random Live user and give him the opportunity to offend many others rather than give them the means to proactively take precautions? Again, I've been on the service; I've experienced the sort of people that frequent it. Unless you're playing with people you know who aren't douches, you are ordinarily overwhelmed by them. That's been my experience. So I have no doubt about what speculawyer stated and feel less inclined to imagine some scenario in which the guy is 'oh gosh, never meant that to happen' 'cause I've come across similar things on the service from people who clearly intended to pull what is essentially a goatse on others.

Yes, it is better. Innocent until proven guilty. If the OP ran into a guy playing porn, the OP can report and be done with it. No need for others who didn't witness the event to go and report something they can't verify happened.

The system of just posting gamertags online so multiple people can report/do things allows for anyone that has been posting for a while to just 'out' any xBox Live user they feel like. No matter how honest and truthful the OP is, that system is simply too easy to abuse, considering the possibilities I mentioned above. If we trust that the OP is honest and wouldn't lie (and I'm sure after a while of him posting, you have good reason to trust him), that still leaves possibilities #2 and #3 or anything similar.

 

[Vinci]

Yes, it is better. Innocent until proven guilty.

At what point did I advocate that the dude get put on trial? I'm not interested in him being convicted of a crime, I'm taking the very good odds that he's merely a douche that I'd prefer never having to deal with and ignoring him.

If the OP ran into a guy playing porn, the OP can report and be done with it. No need for others who didn't witness the event to go and report something they can't verify happened.

Again, this depends on how quickly MS can verify the facts and ban him if he is doing something wrong. Yes, the system can be abused, but if some random Junior Member were to post the same thing, I don't think we'd be as prone to believe him.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree, 'cause I think using 'innocent until proven guilty' as an argument is a bit much when it comes to this situation.

 

[140.85]

Jump In.

:lol

 

[dionusos]

At what point did I advocate that the dude get put on trial? I'm not interested in him being convicted of a crime, I'm taking the very good odds that he's merely a douche that I'd prefer never having to deal with and ignoring him.



Again, this depends on how quickly MS can verify the facts and ban him if he is doing something wrong. Yes, the system can be abused, but if some random Junior Member were to post the same thing, I don't think we'd be as prone to believe him.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree, 'cause I think using 'innocent until proven guilty' as an argument is a bit much when it comes to this situation.

I know you weren't talking about convicting him. I was saying the concept of innocent until proven guilty should also apply when it comes to people trying to get a guy banned from a service that he paid for.

And the reason why you think 'innocent until guilty' is too much is because you're assuming everyone won't go any further than you will (just ignoring the guy). If that was the case I would just agree with you and I would even ENCOURAGE posting gamertags.

But reading the responses, others on here were poised to do more than that as I have repeatedly pointed out. When it gets to the point where people are trying to:

1) look up as much personal info on him as they can
2) get him banned from a service he paid for
3) someone even suggested reporting it to the police

then 'innocent until proven guilty' DOES come into play.

 

[Nolan.]

How come I never come across any of these people .

 

[Christine]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree, 'cause I think using 'innocent until proven guilty' as an argument is a bit much when it comes to this situation.

"Innocent until proven guilty" isn't an argument, it's an ideal of due process. It is an evidentiary presumption that puts the burden of proof on the state in a criminal prosecution.

This is ethically necessary because the state has the power to apply imprisonment, execution or other criminal penalties.

Private individuals engaging in what is essentially gossip have no such ethical constraint. We have no imperative whatsoever to operate under the presumption of innocence.

 

[speculawyer]

I wonder if this ever happens on MS's "Family Game Night"
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/calendar/familygamenight/default.htm

This Ticket to Ride game does support Live Vision cameras:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/games/t/tickettoridexboxlivearcade/

 

[dionusos]

"Innocent until proven guilty" isn't an argument, it's an ideal of due process. It is an evidentiary presumption that puts the burden of proof on the state in a criminal prosecution.

This is ethically necessary because the state has the power to apply imprisonment, execution or other criminal penalties.

Private individuals engaging in what is essentially gossip have no such ethical constraint. We have no imperative whatsoever to operate under the presumption of innocence.

We have no LEGAL constraint, but ethics are a matter of opinion. So whether or not we are held to an ethical constraint is also a matter of opinion. In my opinion, the consideration of any action that affects the accused like getting him banned from XBL, should mean "innocent until proven guilty."

 

[Beardz]

 

[Vinci]

But reading the responses, others on here were poised to do more than that as I have repeatedly pointed out. When it gets to the point where people are trying to:

1) look up as much personal info on him as they can
2) get him banned from a service he paid for
3) someone even suggested reporting it to the police

then 'innocent until proven guilty' DOES come into play.

I think it comes down to the fact that I don't believe they're actually going to do anything. People on the net always run to extremes in conversations, saying they'll do this or that, when the truth is, most won't do anything at all. I can't see people truly taking so much time out of their lives to pursue this person when you have to meander through thousands of others like him routinely whilst online. People with any online history are notoriously desensitized to this sort of thing: This doesn't cause any more blip on their radar than any other online sexual deviancy.

 

[dionusos]

I think it comes down to the fact that I don't believe they're actually going to do anything. People on the net always run to extremes in conversations, saying they'll do this or that, when the truth is, most won't do anything at all. I can't see people truly taking so much time out of their lives to pursue this person when you have to meander through thousands of others like him routinely whilst online. People with any online history are notoriously desensitized to this sort of thing: This doesn't cause any more blip on their radar than any other online sexual deviancy.

Well I hope you're right (unless we get confirmation of guilt). But also if a bunch of members on here just reported the guy on XBL, that might be enough to ban him... that's why I think we need to hold our horses here. You should only report people you have personally witnessed doing something wrong. 1 guy witnesses something he thinks is wrong (but might be a complete misunderstanding altogether, like possibilities #2 or #3 I mentioned), and he tells a forum full of people. Then that forum full of people all report the guy, and I could easily see MS banning him after seeing that many reports from users.