Ashley Madison web site hacked. Sorry cheaters...

[hoosierdaddy1976]

Whatever happened to banging your secretary, then firing her when it got messy?

 

[actaeon277]

Whatever happened to banging your secretary, then firing her when it got messy?

Lawsuits

 

[Cygnus]

Whatever happened to banging your secretary, then firing her when it got messy?

The 80's and 90's happened?

 

[T.Lex]

Lawsuits

You're welcome.

 

[ghuns]

Ask Richard Gere had Crawford, yet...the gerbil......allegedly.

Carolla podcast listener by chance?

 

[jkaetz]

This thread is scary. A lot of people blaming the tool and victims instead of the perpetrators.

The moral implications of using the tool or running the tool shouldn't be considered.

 

[pudly]

This thread is scary. A lot of people blaming the tool and victims instead of the perpetrators.

The moral implications of using the tool or running the tool shouldn't be considered.

 

[T.Lex]

This thread is scary. A lot of people blaming the tool and victims instead of the perpetrators.

The moral implications of using the tool or running the tool shouldn't be considered.

I disagree. I don't think INGOers are blaming the site for getting hacked. Rather, it is hard to justify sympathizing with people who were acting (or trying to act) immorally in the first place.

To address your formulation, if a gun-toting criminal gets shot, I don't sympathize with him very much, even though we shared an interest in firearms. But, I also don't blame the gun.

 

[Fargo]

This thread is scary. A lot of people blaming the tool and victims instead of the perpetrators.

The moral implications of using the tool or running the tool shouldn't be considered.

I blame hackers for being hackers.

I blame adulterers for being adulterers.

I don't blame adulterers for hacking and I don't blame hackers for adultery.

 

[SpiritClump]

I heard about this on Jimmy Kimmel. Check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIO4UgtcAm4

 

[jkaetz]

I disagree. I don't think INGOers are blaming the site for getting hacked. Rather, it is hard to justify sympathizing with people who were acting (or trying to act) immorally in the first place.

To address your formulation, if a gun-toting criminal gets shot, I don't sympathize with him very much, even though we shared an interest in firearms. But, I also don't blame the gun.

Well said but I believe you're skirting the line here. Last I checked, being an adulterer wasn't illegal, only frowned upon by those of us who set our moral standards a bit higher. I see this case being closer to the over 21 college student being raped because he or she had a drink or two and someone didn't accept no for an answer. It seemed like there were a lot of posts that were ok with the identity/financial info being stolen because the victim used a service that the poster didn't agree with.

 

[bradmedic04]

Well said but I believe you're skirting the line here. Last I checked, being an adulterer wasn't illegal, only frowned upon by those of us who set our moral standards a bit higher. I see this case being closer to the over 21 college student being raped because he or she had a drink or two and someone didn't accept no for an answer. It seemed like there were a lot of posts that were ok with the identity/financial info being stolen because the victim used a service that the poster didn't agree with.

So having your info hacked and devious deeds exposed to the world is tantamount to rape in your book? And you find the rest of the reactions in this thread scary? Holy **** man.

 

[pudly]

The heaviest concentration of Ashley Madison subscribers based on zip code is located in the capital of Canada (Ottowa) with 190,000 of 883,000 total population subscribed. I don't know what the percentage of children is in that population, but that must mean that at least 1-in-3 adult Ottowans are involved. Just wow.

I wonder if a similar pattern exists around Washington DC.

Ottawa, the city fun forgot, tops on infidelity website | Reuters

 

[jkaetz]

So having your info hacked and devious deeds exposed to the world is tantamount to rape in your book? And you find the rest of the reactions in this thread scary? Holy **** man.

I didn't say that, you did. You should compare the whole statement instead of part of the statement. The criminal acts are not to be compared individually. The reactions that people have to the situations should be compared. In one people are indifferent because they don't agree with what the victim was doing. In the other people are outraged as you just proved. Are we to be more outraged because the criminal act is more egregious? I would think our reactions should be that neither is acceptable.

 

[jamil]

The conversation is getting a bit OCD.

 

[Fargo]

I didn't say that, you did. You should compare the whole statement instead of part of the statement. The criminal acts are not to be compared individually. The reactions that people have to the situations should be compared. In one people are indifferent because they don't agree with what the victim was doing. In the other people are outraged as you just proved. Are we to be more outraged because the criminal act is more egregious? I would think our reactions should be that neither is acceptable.

Neither hacking or rape? Neither trolling for adultery or dressing scantily? You need to be more specific, your post lends itself to a half dozen different readings. I don't know which one,other,neither,criminal act,victim, you are referring to in any given sentence.

 

[bradmedic04]

I didn't say that, you did. You should compare the whole statement instead of part of the statement. The criminal acts are not to be compared individually. The reactions that people have to the situations should be compared. In one people are indifferent because they don't agree with what the victim was doing. In the other people are outraged as you just proved. Are we to be more outraged because the criminal act is more egregious? I would think our reactions should be that neither is acceptable.

Right, so what you're saying is that my interpretation was exactly the way you meant it. Because both acts are illegal, we should weigh them the exact same way and decide that both are equally wrong. It's illegal to steal a pair of socks. It's illegal to murder someone. I think one is inherently more egregious than the other in that comparison, just as I think a website getting hacked is less egregious than rape.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Well said but I believe you're skirting the line here. Last I checked, being an adulterer wasn't illegal, only frowned upon by those of us who set our moral standards a bit higher. I see this case being closer to the over 21 college student being raped because he or she had a drink or two and someone didn't accept no for an answer. It seemed like there were a lot of posts that were ok with the identity/financial info being stolen because the victim used a service that the poster didn't agree with.

Stretching this a bit far, aren't you?

While I don't condone illegal acts like hacking, that does little to help with my lack of sympathy for the people patronizing the service.

Similarly, I support laws criminalizing the actions of those who knowingly and willfully spread STDs, but I don't feel sorry for the adulterers who go home with something that won't wash off. Same thing here. If you keep your dick in your pants when you aren't at home, you won't have this problem which you largely brought upon yourself. This is entirely different from using an intoxicant to corral someone into doing something that the person would not do voluntarily. No one involved in the hacking was acting in any diminished capacity, unless, of course, you consider moral bankruptcy to be a diminished capacity.

 

[jkaetz]

Very well. I just think we hurt our own arguments when we passionately defend some things but are indifferent about others because we didn't agree with the unpopular activity. Reminds me of how the anti-gunners would be indifferent if a good guy with a gun got into an altercation with a criminal and was injured with his or her own weapon. We would be screaming hang the criminal while the anti-gunners would be indifferent. My example was extreme only to ensure it provoked some thought. Clearly it provoked the wrong thought.

I'm not talking of the posts that are simply expressing their displeasure with the activities connected with the incident, only the ones that are along the lines of not caring or expressing sentiments that the victims somehow deserved to have their info stolen/ransomed/exposed.

 

[actaeon277]

View attachment 40165