Wikisource RfC Options

[Ottava]

I started an RfC to get some cross-wiki light on the isolated group at Wikisource.



If this is the wrong forum to post a message about it, then I apologize. There is no longer a visible thread on the matter, so I started this.

[Somey]

Poetguy has used misleading e-mail addresses before, including addresses containing real names, meant to make us think he's a specific other person who actually exists. Unfortunately, the laws regarding this kind of e-mail impersonation are just as far behind the curve as most other internet-related laws, in virtually all Western democracies. Again, I'm not suggesting that his behavior is excusable, morally defensible, or even tolerable in a civilized society, but I doubt you could get him thrown in jail or even fined for it, and he's certainly not doing it to steal anything - at least not anything tangible.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to throw around terms like "identity theft" and "stalking," you've got to have something better than this to work with. Call it what it is - malicious impersonation. Exaggerating the offense only encourages whatever real criminal impulses he may actually have, by making him think he's got nothing to lose by taking it to the next level.

If Wikipedians can curtail their misuse of the word "stalking" - given that they were, at times, some ofthe worst abusers of this term in the history of written language - then so can you, just like everyone else here.

[Ottava]

Poetguy has used misleading e-mail addresses before, including addresses containing real names, meant to make us think he's a specific other person who actually exists. Unfortunately, the laws regarding this kind of e-mail impersonation are just as far behind the curve as most other internet-related laws, in virtually all Western democracies. Again, I'm not suggesting that his behavior is excusable, morally defensible, or even tolerable in a civilized society, but I doubt you could get him thrown in jail or even fined for it, and he's certainly not doing it to steal anything - at least not anything tangible.

I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to throw around terms like "identity theft" and "stalking," you've got to have something better than this to work with. Call it what it is - malicious impersonation. Exaggerating the offense only encourages whatever real criminal impulses he may actually have, by making him think he's got nothing to lose by taking it to the next level.

If Wikipedians can curtail their misuse of the word "stalking" - given that they were, at times, some ofthe worst abusers of this term in the history of written language - then so can you, just like everyone else here.

The way I see it.

1. The email is registered to a university that does not have open email registration.

2. The email's name is that of someone enrolled at the university.

3. If he is impersonating the individual to attend the university then he lied on his entrance application and broke laws doing so.

4. If he didn't, then he stole someone's email address or impersonated them somehow to get access to their email address. That is a crime in the US - the Sarah Palin hacked email account case.

3 or 4 are crimes and the possibility.


The school itself is part of the University of London system, which makes falsifying information about yourself in some way to get privileges there most likely a crime. I know of one person who sent me an email BCC that was sent to an employee of the school to expose Poetlister's act.

[lilburne]

3. If he is impersonating the individual to attend the university then he lied on his entrance application and broke laws doing so.

4. If he didn't, then he stole someone's email address or impersonated them somehow to get access to their email address. ter's act.

1. Which laws be specific.
2. You haven't ruled out connivance.

"I know of one person who sent me an email BCC that was sent to an employee of the school to expose Poetlister's act."

Isn't that being rather stalky itself possibly getting someone in trouble on their course simply for playing a game on a website?

Why not simply email the account and ask whether they are aware of the usage?

[Ottava]

3. If he is impersonating the individual to attend the university then he lied on his entrance application and broke laws doing so.

4. If he didn't, then he stole someone's email address or impersonated them somehow to get access to their email address. ter's act.

1. Which laws be specific.
2. You haven't ruled out connivance.

"I know of one person who sent me an email BCC that was sent to an employee of the school to expose Poetlister's act."

Isn't that being rather stalky itself possibly getting someone in trouble on their course simply for playing a game on a website?

Why not simply email the account and ask whether they are aware of the usage?

1. I'm sure there are multiple laws that apply. Falsifying governmental documents is normally a crime to ensure people don't.

2. Doesn't seem likely knowing Poetlister's background. The girl appears to be a Freshman/Sophmore now and not someone he would have just happened upon.


And notifying about improper use of an email account is standard, especially when there is suspicion of it being fraudulently used. Emailing the account wont do anything as the email is most likely hacked. That is like asking a burglar if he owns the house instead of calling the police when you have a strong suspicion he doesn't.