Ashley Madison web site hacked. Sorry cheaters...

[Bfish]

Anyone got popcorn? Because this could get interesting

That's what I am saying, I am interested to see what comes from all of this if dots are connected...

 

[IndyDave1776]

 

[OutdoorDad]

You need to grow up. In case your understanding is too limited to grasp the concept, let me explain that there is a great deal of middle ground between being a pharisee and being permissive to the level you seem to demand in order to meet your misguided understanding of being a decent person. You sound very much like the advocates for assorted progressive causes who insist that if you do not actively carry water for their chosen ones, you are a racist, bigot, and generally nasty person.

Now, put your insults away for 30 seconds and engage in some critical thought. Do you really think that it is necessary to accept and condone the misdeeds of others and actively feel sympathy for their experience of the consequences which are a natural product of an extreme form of betrayal that they perpetrated on their spouses?

If you are going to insist on your position, perhaps you should take up with God his apparent unfair and judgmental position in allowing Hell to exist. After all, as you SHOULD understand, it is a natural consequence of sin for those who choose not to accept salvation, just as being set out front is a very natural and predictable consequence of engaging in adultery over the internet.

Now, if you are willing to be the slightest bit intellectually honest, how are you going to continue your 'drunk at the keyboard' excuse to the ongoing review of profiles, contact, and arranging an in-person meeting as being basically accidental in nature? How is it that you are suggesting that counseling their kids becomes our responsibility while we are supposed to condone the initial misdeed? I will agree with the notion of helping kids who need it, but you are conveniently bypassing the reason why they would need that help. Since you seem to be having a difficult time with this, let me break it down for you: No, those children DO NOT 'have it coming'. It was imposed on them by a parent's unacceptable conduct, not by my disapproval of that conduct. In fact, that is a significant reason for my disapproval. If you really believe that disapproval of adultery is necessarily a product of hatred and immaturity, you really need to rethink your thoughts.

If you are going to stand by your position, there is a religious institution you may consider joining:

Well, since you've chosen to engage on the subject.

1) I'm FULLY grown. New to this forum doesn't mean new to this world.
2) My understanding isn't limited in the least. I disagree with you.
3) I understand the definition of Pharisee. I don't think that was the word you wanted to use. Maybe it is the word you intended to use. But it is incorrect.
4) I didn't insult. But I'm willing to reconsider my position and insult as appropriate.
5) Didn't accept nor condone any misdeeds. But I refuse to judge others in their interactions with their God. My God taught me that.
6) Vengeance is not reserved for me. It is not my role. Another will repay.
7) I'm delighted to be the "slightest bit" intellectually honest. I didn't excuse. I refused to judge. That is not my role in this world.
8) Please don't "break it down" unless you are MC Hammer or you've hired Jimmy Jam to be your producer.
9) If its not clear yet, your disapproval means little to me.
10) you seem to be familiar with the "ongoing review of profiles, contact, and arranging an in-person meeting" process of their website. I'll defer to your superior knowledge.
11) Thanks for the cartoon.


Have fun with your popcorn.

 

[IndyDave1776]

And now I'll bring it back full circle to where I started. If you all will let me...

There are two camps:
1) People who engage in activities that I don't agree with deserve any misfortune that befalls them. In fact, I rejoice in their discomfort.
2) No one deserves to be abused and taken advantage of.

Those who fall into category 1 think and say things like "I'm glad that a-hole down the street was murdered in his sleep" or "'the gays' deserve to catch aids because of their abhorrent behavior". Or "damn meth heads stole a car and drove it into a bridge abutment, it killed them all and they deserved it"

Category 2 thinkers are rolling these thoughts in their heads "the a-hole down the street got hacked to death in his sleep! Never liked the sob, but sad to know someone was killed" or "that sucks. No one needs to get aids and die." Or "poor kids. I wish they had never gotten messed up in meth. There is no happiness at the end of that road."

And right NOW. AT THIS VERY MOMENT, someone is thinking that they'd be perfectly happy if a poster or two above got run over by a bus.
And they are cloaking their hatred and immaturity in the guise of righteousness.

I think it was a beautiful admonition that all of us are in the crowd of onlookers being asked to examine OURSELVES. And we aren't the one who asks "who is without sin?".

Sucks for these folk. Two too many beers on a late night computer binge. And they wound up with an account. And now their marriage is over. That really sucks. And for those of you who are still tickled about it, how about signing up to do some counciling for the kids who are affected? Or did they have it coming too??

Well, since you've chosen to engage on the subject.

1) I'm FULLY grown. New to this forum doesn't mean new to this world.
2) My understanding isn't limited in the least. I disagree with you. You presented an argument based on the notion that there are only two positions, which stands in evidence that your understanding is limited.
3) I understand the definition of Pharisee. I don't think that was the word you wanted to use. Maybe it is the word you intended to use. But it is incorrect. No, you obviously don't. A Pharisee, among other less than desirable traits, would generally have believed himself to have lived a life free of sin and would readily condescend upon and condemn others based on his perceived self-righteousness, which was exactly the quality I was invoking.
4) I didn't insult. But I'm willing to reconsider my position and insult as appropriate. Determining that anyone disagreeing with you is harboring hatred and immaturity cloaked as righteousness isn't an insult? If that isn't I couldn't imagine what would qualify as in insult.
5) Didn't accept nor condone any misdeeds. But I refuse to judge others in their interactions with their God. My God taught me that. Again, you present a false dichotomy suggesting that lack of sympathy for natural consequences constitutes judgment in the context of that reserved for God. As the mature person you purport to be, if you put your hand on a hot stove and burn yourself, no, I am not going to feel sorry for you for doing something that stupid. A child would be a different story. Likewise, I feel zero sympathy for people getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
6) Vengeance is not reserved for me. It is not my role. Another will repay. Withholding of sympathy is not vengeance.
7) I'm delighted to be the "slightest bit" intellectually honest. I didn't excuse. I refused to judge. That is not my role in this world.
8) Please don't "break it down" unless you are MC Hammer or you've hired Jimmy Jam to be your producer.
9) If its not clear yet, your disapproval means little to me. IDGAF
10) you seem to be familiar with the "ongoing review of profiles, contact, and arranging an in-person meeting" process of their website. I'll defer to your superior knowledge. That is the stupidest thing I have read all week, even after reviewing some of Hillary Clinton's lame excuses. Ray Charles can see that the purpose of that website is direct personal contact with another person. The intermediate steps, of which there are several, should be patently obvious to anyone with the requisite sense to figure his way out of bed in the morning. I do not appreciate the implied insult regarding my supposedly superior knowledge of the use of a service such as that provided by Ashley Madison.
11) Thanks for the cartoon. If the shoe fits, wear it.


Have fun with your popcorn.

.

 

[T.Lex]

Interesting. Two of them from carmel.in.gov

 

[magic man]

Interesting. Two of them from carmel.in.gov

2 from Greenwood, 1 from Indiana Commission of Higher Education, 1 from Dearborn county, 1 from Highland, and 1 from Terre Haute also.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Why would anyone use their work email to join a site like that, or even to correspond with someone they met on a site like that?

I wouldn't think of doing that with INGO, let alone Ashley Madison.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Why would anyone use their work email to join a site like that, or even to correspond with someone they met on a site like that?

Yeah, there's going to be a solid layer of plausible deniability since anyone can make an account with whatever address they want. However, it'll definitely rattle some relationships. I see divorces, suicides, homicides... in the near future.

 

[Mark-DuCo]

2 from Greenwood, 1 from Indiana Commission of Higher Education, 1 from Dearborn county, 1 from Highland, and 1 from Terre Haute also.

6 from bloomington.in.gov

 

[T.Lex]

Why would anyone use their work email to join a site like that, or even to correspond with someone they met on a site like that?

I wouldn't think of doing that with INGO, let alone Ashley Madison.

Ashley Madison Affairs Site Alleged Data Dump And How To Find It

According to Forbes (second page):

Further, even legitimate data has veracity limitations. As Krebs and many others emphasize, the Ashley Madison sign-up process did not require verification of the email address used.

Which is a double edged sword. If the email address was not verified, people could use any email address they wanted. But, how many users knew that beforehand? How likely is it that someone would use a legitimate email address that belonged to someone else? That would've been somewhat risky, in case there was a confirmatory email sent out.

ETA:
One report suggests credit cards might've been leaked, too. That'd be harder to deny.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

One report suggests credit cards might've been leaked, too. That'd be harder to deny.

Yeah, I think some info included salary info (whatever the user put in), and other personal information. I'm sure if someone looks at the right leaked data, they'd be able to determine if the sign-up was legit or not.

 

[pudly]

Why would anyone use their work email to join a site like that, or even to correspond with someone they met on a site like that?

Maybe because their spouse has access to their personal e-mail account? I agree that using a work e-mail isn't smart, but then that isn't a requirement for joining Ashley Madison in the first place.

 

[HoughMade]

Yeah, I think some info included salary info (whatever the user put in)...

Reduce by 50-85% for accuracy....and add 50 lbs.

 

[printcraft]

Obama administration emails found in Ashley Madison data dump | Washington Examiner

 

[HoughMade]

Are there any profiles that include

MWF, sixtysomething, with open relationship seeks like minded male or female who's into Saul Alinsky, acting like you care and dubious land deals.
respond HRC2016@supersecretserver.com

 

[SEIndSAM]

Are there any profiles that include

Rep Nazis won't let me Rep yet....

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The names of 10 powerful CEOs have been confirmed with matching CCN's and IP. It's just getting started.

 

[mrjarrell]

Just saw a piece that outed Josh Duggar, the child molesting family values lobbyist, as an account holder. Had his home address and everything. Sheesh. Wonder if his wife will forgive that as easily as she forgave his molesting of his sisters?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Just saw a piece that outed Josh Duggar, the child molesting family values lobbyist, as an account holder. Had his home address and everything. Sheesh. Wonder if his wife will forgive that as easily as she forgave his molesting of his sisters?

Yeah, Gawker outed this one. I can see them dedicating a team of 50 interns to dig through the data to find anyone remotely Conservative or religious. That's just... Gawker being Gawker.

 

[mrjarrell]

Yeah, Gawker outed this one. I can see them dedicating a team of 50 interns to dig through the data to find anyone remotely Conservative or religious. That's just... Gawker being Gawker.

But they were right. I have a feeling lots of conservative, family values types are going to go down over this one. Probably more than a few dems, too. But that's to be expected.