Using your same metaphor, if you came to another person’s house and all they did was shit on their family, and then make dark jokes about killing them - is it all fun and games until something bad happens?
There are lines. You don’t know what Derek saw.
But apparently it was so bad that a lot of people are really disgusted at the core group.
that’s true, but judging by this thread people are also really sensitive about this kind of shit, so it wouldn’t take very much for people to get pissed off like this.
Yeah, I’m one of those people. I have this apparently strange sensitivity to people sharing intimate photos of others without their consent or knowledge. Feels very exploitative. I’m just one of those people who doesn’t like to sit back and let people hurt others like that for the lols of a group chat.
Sorry, compromising photos and messages if we want to be pedantic. If you’re nit picking the nuance ls of the type of private content shared without someone’s consent you’ve already lost.
intimate photos implies, sexting, which is, a crime, according to people here. So yes, the semantics do matter :)
If you’re nit picking the nuance ls of the type of private content shared without someone’s consent you’ve already lost.
that’s my problem though, i can’t tell you what it is. Was it bad for them to do that? Probably? Does my opinion of them change if it was harmless shitposting between friends, vs genuinely talking behind the backs of various people for no discernable reason. Yes. But we don’t know that.
Unfortunately I am not god, and do not make the rules, so i cannot control what justice is and isn’t done.
Well read the post again. One girl was furious that raunchy texts were shared. Looks like we’ve solved the mystery lol.
But I’m not out here making a legal argument. I’m saying sharing that stuff without consent isn’t OK, morally. You don’t have to be god to look at something like that and have the guts to say something.
Using your same metaphor, if you came to another person’s house and all they did was shit on their family, and then make dark jokes about killing them - is it all fun and games until something bad happens?
There are lines. You don’t know what Derek saw.
But apparently it was so bad that a lot of people are really disgusted at the core group.
that’s true, but judging by this thread people are also really sensitive about this kind of shit, so it wouldn’t take very much for people to get pissed off like this.
Yeah, I’m one of those people. I have this apparently strange sensitivity to people sharing intimate photos of others without their consent or knowledge. Feels very exploitative. I’m just one of those people who doesn’t like to sit back and let people hurt others like that for the lols of a group chat.
weird that you mention sharing explicit photos, because that’s something that didn’t happen. If we’re to believe OP, that is.
Sorry, compromising photos and messages if we want to be pedantic. If you’re nit picking the nuance ls of the type of private content shared without someone’s consent you’ve already lost.
intimate photos implies, sexting, which is, a crime, according to people here. So yes, the semantics do matter :)
that’s my problem though, i can’t tell you what it is. Was it bad for them to do that? Probably? Does my opinion of them change if it was harmless shitposting between friends, vs genuinely talking behind the backs of various people for no discernable reason. Yes. But we don’t know that.
Unfortunately I am not god, and do not make the rules, so i cannot control what justice is and isn’t done.
Well read the post again. One girl was furious that raunchy texts were shared. Looks like we’ve solved the mystery lol.
But I’m not out here making a legal argument. I’m saying sharing that stuff without consent isn’t OK, morally. You don’t have to be god to look at something like that and have the guts to say something.
yeah, that implies shit like “im so horny i wanna fuck you right now” not literal nudes.
though yes, sharing things without consent is definitely immoral, or unethical. It’s hard to argue otherwise. Even in the case of derek.