[Discussion] Warsie, Testing, + Fallout

[Broomstick]

I am REALLY concerned about this, though, I don't see how Mike as the board ownership can avoid a nasty lawsuit now.

Cross-border lawsuits are hideously expensive and difficult - I doubt that Mike is going to see a deluge of US lawsuits filed against him, and most other countries are nearly as sue-happy. However, I would NOT want to see this impede his ability to travel to the US, and I seem to recall that he has indeed traveled to the US on business in the past.

I would recommend that Mike consult with a lawyer about this to protect his own interests rather than rely on message board advice (save for actual lawyers on this board who volunteer advice, should they be so inclined).

I do think shutting the whole operation down is an over-reaction, as is "closing registration". This is one person who committed a criminal act, why punish everyone else, the vast majority of whom are innocent?

Again, I'd say Mike should notify the authorities (in the US I'd report Warsie as a child porn pusher to the FBI, but I'm not sure what would be appropriate for a Canadian - another reason for Mike to speak with a lawyer in his area.)

Can anyone seriously assert, after all, that "overreactions" here are unacceptable in the context of their having even a small chance of someone's real-life situation being completely destroyed?

Reality isn't safe - what's to prevent someone from slipping something disgusting or criminal into your home mailbox? What's to prevent someone from stealing your car and using it to commit a crime? What if someone steals your identity and then commits a crime using your name? What prevent someone from doing such a "prank" on any other web site with unmoderated posting? This problem is not unique to SDN.

Life isn't safe. You can't make it safe. That said, you can make it safer, but you still have to be reasonable - unless you want to live in a prison of your own making.

Mike should consult a lawyer for legal advice pertinent to his situation. Any decision as to freezing or shutting down the board would then be his choice, as forum owner.

Mike, I really feel bad about this - you certainly didn't anticipate this when you created this place, and you sure as hell don't deserve this particular headache.

[Gil Hamilton]

In conversation with individuals who would prefer anonymity, it's been pointed out to me that we are only hearing about the fallout secondhand. These people wonder why we haven't heard any firsthand stories of fallout. Moreover, they also suggest that anybody at the FBI tracing the searches would see the flood of links from SDN, put 2 and 2 together, and realize that this was a prank. I felt that this viewpoint should at least be mentioned in this thread.

Surlethe has a point. In both cases, it's the friends of someone who got burnt by the links, not themselves. I'm not saying that they didn't happen, but we should keep it in mind.

[fgalkin]

A point of interest.

While most of Warsie's posts come from a different IP address, the one in question came from 209.175.47.162

There was one user who used that IP address before: Star Wars Fan, who was banned for advocating pedophilia in 2005.

Wikipedia says that

This IP address, 209.175.47.162, is registered to an educational institution and may be shared by multiple users. If the institution uses proxy servers, this IP address may in fact represent many users at many physical computers.

but no one else seems to confirm this, and the name similarity is just too much to be a coincidence.

Something to consider.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Mad]

In conversation with individuals who would prefer anonymity, it's been pointed out to me that we are only hearing about the fallout secondhand. These people wonder why we haven't heard any firsthand stories of fallout.

True, it does seem odd: Several people in one job clicking on the link? The IT team not noticing that the URLs are exactly the same on different computers? Of course, if even one of the stories is true, that's one too many.

Moreover, they also suggest that anybody at the FBI tracing the searches would see the flood of links from SDN, put 2 and 2 together, and realize that this was a prank. I felt that this viewpoint should at least be mentioned in this thread.

Wouldn't the FBI see the link from tinyurl? That still should be a tipoff, and I'm sure they realize that a certain amount of hits are false positives from situations like these. It's not very comforting, though, and it's certainly not something I'd want to count on.

Of course, it seems that the FBI hasn't even gotten involved here (yet?). What we're apparently seeing is the IT staff of several organizations seeing something that looks like potential illegal activity and trying to save themselves future trouble by getting rid of the apparent offenders.

Anyway, taking broad measures like closing registrations and preventing all hyperlinking is quite simply an overreaction. I doubt the board will come under fire, since the content wasn't generated by the administrative staff and it was taken care of as quickly as possible once it was noticed. Any verdict against the board would make every other website that hosts user-generated content subject to lawsuits. (Tinyurl would be a better target for a lawsuit, since it hides the actual link in normal usage; that always scared me because I didn't know what the link on the other side was.)

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I do agree it's possible all of this is a hoax until we have further evidence; I'm certainly paranoid enough to imagine it's possible. On the other hand, I'm also paranoid enough to recommend acting anyway. Furthermore, as I understood it, they just fired everyone at that one job who had used their computers to browse non-approved websites, since they agreed that the one guy in specific wasn't actually guilty of anything, but they wanted to wash their hands of the whole mess, so they fired everyone who was browsing private forums on company time.

[fgalkin]

I would like to say that I strongly agree with Surlethe's post. If someone was to bring down the board, this seems to be a rather good method (closing down registrations? Banning a hundred users?). It may be the paranoid Russian, but this seems somewhat suspicious to me.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I would like to say that I strongly agree with Surlethe's post. If someone was to bring down the board, this seems to be a rather good method (closing down registrations? Banning a hundred users?). It may be the paranoid Russian, but this seems somewhat suspicious to me.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

I don't disagree with you at all, I'm equally suspicious of the people giving these reports, but I also just considered the issue to serious to be ignored.

[Gil Hamilton]

I think we should continue business as usual. We have the thread and Warsie's actions firmly documented. It hurts nothing to send people that information should they request it. Warsie is banished and thoroughly reviled. At this point, I kind of think we are done in the actions we should take. If all that has been said is true, Warsie deserves to be slapped repeatedly in the balls with the flat of a T-square, but there isn't much more we the Senate can really do.

[Imperial Overlord]

I think we should go about our business as usual. Masking urls should be eliminated, if possible, documentation of this incident should be kept by responsible parties, and we deal with any additional fall out as it comes.

[Gil Hamilton]

I think we should go about our business as usual. Masking urls should be eliminated, if possible, documentation of this incident should be kept by responsible parties, and we deal with any additional fall out as it comes.

Yeah. I see no reason why using tinyurl should continue on these forums. Other than that, we shouldn't make a huge fuss anymore.

[phongn]

A point of interest.

While most of Warsie's posts come from a different IP address, the one in question came from 209.175.47.162

There was one user who used that IP address before: Star Wars Fan, who was banned for advocating pedophilia in 2005.

That IP address resolves to the Chicago Public School system; the idiot did this at school

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Well well well. Now we do have someone to contact--the Chicago Public Schools. Considering Zero Tolerance, we can at least get him expelled.

[phongn]

Well well well. Now we do have someone to contact--the Chicago Public Schools. Considering Zero Tolerance, we can at least get him expelled.

Maybe; it depends on the setup.

[Coyote]

Another, from someone who's been here awhile.

Hi there.

Now, I thought I was ok since I was on my lunchbreak and recreational surfing is allowed, but today I got hauled in for 'disciplinary review'. I came a hair's-breadth from getting fired, mostly I was kept on because we're understaffed and because my boss likes me and knows I'm a good guy.

The fallout;
* This incident is now in my HR file, and can follow me wherever I go in life.
* Its almost definite my annual pay raise is going to be lower, and may not happen at all.
* The content of the link was automatically (company policy) reported to local law enforcement. Now, they deduced after about 10 seconds that I hadn't done anything wrong, but here's the kicker;

I volunteer with kids in my community. I got a letter notifying myself that my status as being an 'acceptible child guardian' is now up for review, and until that gets settled I can't do any work with kids by myself. I love the kids I work with, they need positive people in their life.

...[edited for possible ID giveaways -- Coyote]

F@CK warsie.

Feel free to disclose this story, but not my name.

P.S. The photoshop/paint thing helped, I was able to use that. Thanks.

[Broomstick]

Well well well. Now we do have someone to contact--the Chicago Public Schools. Considering Zero Tolerance, we can at least get him expelled.

Maybe; it depends on the setup.

I can't imagine the CPS would have ANY tolerance for this sort of shit - I lived in Chicago 15 years, trust me, the local culture is VERY condemning of this sort of thing.

[phongn]

I can't imagine the CPS would have ANY tolerance for this sort of shit - I lived in Chicago 15 years, trust me, the local culture is VERY condemning of this sort of thing.

No - I mean, identifying Warsie-the-person. If it localizes to a computer lab, for example, they might not be able to figure out who it is.

That said, we know an IP, the time (1237 Central, edited 1303 Central), which may be sufficient.

EDIT: Also, CPS's IT information may be found here: http://www.cps.k12.il.us/AboutCPS/Depar ... _Services/

[Broomstick]

Most computer labs have some means of determining who was using a terminal at a particular time. Hell, they had that back in 1976 when I first logged onto a mainframe (PC's hadn't been invented yet).

Also, if Warsie's real life self is equally clueless as his on-line self, it should be pretty easy to pick him out of a group just based on behavioral traits.

[phongn]

Most computer labs have some means of determining who was using a terminal at a particular time. Hell, they had that back in 1976 when I first logged onto a mainframe (PC's hadn't been invented yet).

Open-use labs might not if there's no login for a specific user - hence why I qualified that it may be dependant on setup.

[Sea Skimmer]

You know before people go launching lawsuits and the rest of it, someone might want to investigate these reports of firings and expulsions over this thread. This is the internet, just because someone sends a PM doesn’t mean what they say happened, and it would be especially fucked up if people are exploiting this situation not make it seem worse then it is. Not trying to be a skeptic or make accusations, just words of warning.

[Sea Skimmer]

From a concerned denizen

As a long time lurker I just want to point out that I find some of these stories slightly unlikely, as sites like CNN can often have "kiddie porn" in the URL, such as this story:

http://www.cnn.com/US/9704/08/kiddie.po ... index.html
or
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/inter ... ml?related

I doubt that a workplace would fire you for that, and would be just as less likely to fire you for the FBI page. It might throw up a flag, but since it clearly isn't kiddie porn, at most all it would do is get someone fired for surfing during work when they shouldn't. Which sucks, but thats a risk you take surfing the web at work.

Just my 2 cents

[Coyote]

Some interesting insight from a denizen:

Hi Coyote,

I'm an employee with a relatively small (25,000 student) school district, I can't be sure that this would be acted on, but I suspect that it would.

Because of CIPA, a school district will almost certainly have a log on any internet access, by combining this information with the site URL and the time of the posting, identification of Warsie should be possible.

At my site, this would almost certainly result in, at the least, get dinged as violating the AUP. CPS's can be found at http://policy.cps.k12.il.us/documents/604.2.pdf. By my reading he is in violation of sections III-B-2 through III-B-4.

I would suspect that ANY contact with their Technology Services department would result in the board being blocked by their firewall, as it probably should be, given the content of ARSE.

Please feel free to post this message, but leave out any identifiable info.

May be worth a look.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

I think we should go about our business as usual. Masking urls should be eliminated, if possible, documentation of this incident should be kept by responsible parties, and we deal with any additional fall out as it comes.

Yeah. I see no reason why using tinyurl should continue on these forums. Other than that, we shouldn't make a huge fuss anymore.

Would outlawing the use of tinyurl or similar services really help matters, though? I believe we still have people bitching about having read spoilers in threads that are clearly marked as having spoilers, after all. There are folk who'd probably absentmindedly click on a link marked

Code: Select all

www_dot_thisimaginarysiteisfullofillegalshitandwarez_dot_com/ZOMG_ILLEGAL_PR0N

if it were undressed.

Yes, it would make it harder for retards like Warsie to pull off these sorts of empty-headed stunts, but only marginally so.

Furthermore, I have to echo the sentiment that all these second-hand accounts of fallout are somewhat suspect. We know all about anecdotal evidence and how reliable it can (or cannot) be. If there is to be an investigation, it should start with requesting that these folk be willing to provide, at least, a notarized statement, or possibly initiating contact with their employer/former employer's IT department.

I can see where an IT person might have a few hand-wringing moments upon seeing a worker click through a link in a thread on an internet BBS marked "Does she look 14?" to what appears to be a search for illegal materials.

However, to echo Sea Skimmer's posts, the worst most of these folks could be reprimanded for is inappropriate use of company resources.
Some companies take this more seriously than others (imagine the ethical issues, and PR fallout that might come from someone getting wind that someone from XYZ Company was looking up illegal materials.) From a professional perspective, a great deal of discretion and paranoia really should be exercised when surfing the internet at work.

[Coyote]

I got this from Shep, who approved me to use his name:

Much of the peanut gallery is saying "this is all an overreaction"; but I strongly disagree.

I used to have a job last year and I thought everything was going fine until the boss called me in and said he was letting me go because of "problems" with my background check. Upon looking at them, I found out that according to some fly by night background check company, I had been charged with murder in Prince George's County. To add insult to injury, the date for this murder was during a time when I was currently a guest of the Montgomery County Detention Center at Seven Locks Road.

I certainly can believe the stories put forth about paranoid IT departments; especially the "auto report" to police. That means something is now floating around in regards to them; and how are you going to explain "possible child porn charges" when it comes up five years from now in a background check by some company as a prerequistite to hiring?

He later makes a point (in another message) that people who fear we are "overreacting" don't realize that "pranks" of this nature can, in fact, have real consequences --and some just want to continue to spam infantile things without adult interference or concern for repercussions.

I admit a certain identification with this point of view. There is a time for certain types of jokes and there is a time to serious up. If Warsie had made a "funny" comment about "I got a jar of sarin" in his carry-on bag in an airport security line, his defense of "I was just joking!" wouldn't hold any water there, either.

[Coyote]

Moar from the streets:

As a less extreme option to banning huge numbers of users out of hand but still probably not for serious consideration, proof of identification could be required when signing up.
A scanned copy of photo ID and a picture of the person holding up a piece of paper with the username and stardestroyer.net sent with the registration email where it can be stored non-publicly, most likely by Mr. Wong himself.
While photoshop might be an issue it would be something to send to the police/FBI in the cases of illegal activity.

[Edi]

Moar from the streets:

As a less extreme option to banning huge numbers of users out of hand but still probably not for serious consideration, proof of identification could be required when signing up.
A scanned copy of photo ID and a picture of the person holding up a piece of paper with the username and stardestroyer.net sent with the registration email where it can be stored non-publicly, most likely by Mr. Wong himself.
While photoshop might be an issue it would be something to send to the police/FBI in the cases of illegal activity.

Not really workable or verifiable.