Celebrities and Regular Joes, or - What comes first, the Innocent or the Guilty?

Originally posted in the Senate Floor:

Events that have taken place at other places on these forums lead me to this post. I know that this area is a non-SW section, but posts of this nature have been deleted elsewhere, and the members who posted them have been banned. I'm not a complete cynic, I'd like to think that Freedom of Speech (as long as it's rational) still exists in the Senate, at least.

I'm going to stress this point. This post will not be inflammatory or abusive. It will not accuse innocent people. It will not rant, flame, or be otherwise immature and unacceptable. It will not be untrue. It will be kept as far away from Star Wars as possible. I would then assume that this thread would be allowed to remain open for discussion.

Recently a good friend of mine was accused by someone of sending her threatening emails, including death threats. The person who recieved these emails is a prominent writer, who myself and others have had run-ins with before. It is fair to say we are not best of friends. However, sending death threats or alluding to other forms of physical harm is something none of us have done or would ever do, publically or privately (as this author has stated has happened).

I will not go any further into the details of this incident here in order to stick to the non-SW theme. The story can be read in Han_and_Leia_Rule's editorial on this subject at the following address:

My friend's statement can be found here:


The point of the discussion is this: my friend was not given a chance to talk with any moderators before she was banned. She found out only why she was banned one day later after extensive emailing and pming by her friends. The person who told her why she had been banned was not supposed to even tell her. What kind of a system is this where people are punished without even being informed of what it is they've done wrong? She has not been given a chance to prove her innocence. She has simply been told that if she cannot name someone else (i.e prove that a) her account was hacked, and b) exactly who it was - something the mods themselves are unable to do) then she will remain considered the culprit, and essentially guilty until proven innocent.

The real problem comes up here. This same situation has happened to me before, with someone hacking my pm and email accounts and sending threatening messages on 'my' behalf. I too was never able to prove what happened. I got off only because the culprit later admitted guilt. However, I was not, nor have I ever been, banned, despite the similarity of the situations. The only difference being here is that while the recipient of 'my' emails was 'merely' another JC member, my friend's recipient is a famous author.

There is also the issue of people not being banned for off-site activity. Other users on this forum have been privy to and part of horrible behaviour towards eachother and others, and have been let off, because the JC moderators do not deal with off-site events. Which is fair. The alleged incident my friend was banned for, however, also happened off site, and a permanent banning was handed down. Is it fair for moderators to police what goes on outside their borders?

Which brings me to this question of double-sided justice. Why did my friend not even get a chance to prove her innocence? Why have other people emailing on her behalf been told that it could not even be considered the author in question could have been mistaken, and that her words must be taken on face value (i.e, not questioned)?

Is this fair? I believe not. Is this a case of the celebrity being more innocent than the humble man?

I believe so.

C_Minor

Edit: Links edited out due to profanity on pages being linked to.

 

I think you're on to something, Cminor. There definitely seems to be a double standard out there, and the JC is no exception. This whole mess has been nothing short of a witch hunt. Just shut down the poster in question, before some 'big time' author gets offended. Dude, whatever. The girl is like a scapegoat. Ban her, and the JC can rest easy that it's 'done it's job'. Innocent. Guilty. Who cares? At least they get to keep one more author hanging around to add 'prestige' and 'legitimize' their lit forum. Woowee. Forget that between Tara's work on the Fanfic thread, the enthusiastic voice she adds to the LFL Strikes Back Thread, and her website in general, she's added way more than any 'celebrity' poster ever has. Tie Tara to the stake, and light the match. But it's the JC that's shooting itself in the foot.