Quote from: suchmoon on March 04, 2020, 04:23:18 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2020, 02:22:21 PM

This is due to your policy "No public evidence, can not do anything" on one hand, and me not tolerating abuse on the other hand.

Yet it doesn't provide any "evidence" so what was the point? Makes me think that the "secret evidence" in other cases, such as Kalemder's, is similarly flimsy to non-existent.

No, this is not a request to publish any more PMs, and not an excuse to blame others for your lapse in judgement.

PMs are not private, and therefore I will publish evidence where I seem that it is necessary (unless secrecy is asked). If you want to defend them or claim their innocence, I leave that up to you. Just do not blame me down the road for whatever comes out of not acting in time. Thanks.

Quote from: suchmoon on March 04, 2020, 04:23:18 PM

Publishing PMs is uncalled for.

I'll follow your exclusion list (among many other individuals) closely relating to these recent events, and let's see if uniformity is going to hold up on what is uncalled for and how it gets handled. I on the other hand strongly disagree, I believe theymos also sides with this view (not related to this particular case). That is, this view:

Quote from: Quickseller on March 04, 2020, 06:11:01 PM

Publishing a personal message is 100% acceptable. Unless explicitly agreed upon ahead of time, there should not be any expectation of confidentiality when sending a PM. This is regardless of who publishes the message so long as it is being done by someone sending or receiving the message.