"Puzzling People" by Thomas Sheridan - a puzzling person
- Thread starter Gawan
- Start date
Mr. Premise
The Living Force
I guess we can "thank" Sheridan for bringing lots of new people here to the forum. Funny how what the defaming types do ends up. Wong the opposite of what they want.
Perceval said:
I am a newly joined member of this forum. I have some comments and questions regarding this post:
Let me understand this. You want to violate these women’s privacy because they have made some personal choices, (their right) that you and this A disagree with? It sounds as if these women have already been violated and victimized. I want to know how you justify victimizing these women further by this witch-hunt. Do you intend to publicize your findings and defame them here on this forum and elsewhere like you have done to this Sheridan fellow once you collect your information about them?
I don’t know this Sheridan, I have followed this thread and I still don’t have an opinion one way or the other and when I do I will keep it to myself. I don’t know these women either and I wish I did so I could inform them of this very unethical proposal. This violation that has been proposed to commit against them sounds very chilling.
These questions are not rhetorical I respectfully ask that you answer them because that answer will inform me as to whether this forum is a valid one, if it respects it’s own manifesto (This proposal has been made by an administrator), and if I want to take seriously the information here. On the surface this forum looks potentially very enlightening and provocative but if this is what is lying beneath I don’t think it is what I initially thought it was.
Mod: Fixed quote tags.
Wrong bar, corvo. 
corvo said:
Well, first you must understand that for you to be able to determine whether or not this forum is 'valid', you would need to have a reasonable ability to think. From your post, it doesn't seem you have such an ability, because you seem to believe that researching publicly available information on individuals is "violating privacy"!
Don Genaro
Jedi Council Member
Ah now, in fairness... Corvo was simply being a little passive-agressive and threatening not to like the forum if it turned out that we were evil. Hardly a reason for a ban? 
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
corvo said:
No, not at all. You're wayyyyy off base here. What I'm looking at are these "women's" public posts to see if any of them actually ARE Sheridan.
If these women are who they say they are, or even if they are actually women, they have absolutely NOTHING to worry about....at least not from me (can't say the same about Sheridan) If one of them turns out to be Sheridan running a female sockpuppet (fake profile), than yes, I will expose that.
corvo said:
As others have already mentioned, whenever we, or a member of our forum (e.g. Guardian), does some research into a person, it is always using publicly available sources. There is no violation of privacy. It is really no different than what an investigative journalist does when researching a person's past and connections for a feature article. We are a research forum here, and that includes checking on people's claims and connections to see if they are who they say they are. We like to fact check. By doing so, in the past we have discovered more than a few con-artists, sex offenders, and spooks, so it has been worth it. It is nothing like a witch-hunt, which I would characterize as establishing a person's guilt and then slandering and libeling them, while fabricating evidence against them. We do nothing of the sort here, and in fact have exposed people who engage in exactly that sort of behavior.
There is nothing unethical about conducting research into a person's publicly available history and past.
Your questions may not be rhetorical in one sense of the word. But they are in another: "language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience." You use emotionally charged words and phrases ("violating", "victimizing", "witch hunt", "chilling violation") stated as if they are facts, rather than opinions.
Approaching Infinity said:
Indeed. Corvo, you missed the obvious point that the information we use is publicly available - which is exactly what was done with Sheridan's case. Exposing facts is very different from defaming. Actually, he confirmed himself that he was the author of those posts in which he did his best to treat women as disposable objects and indulge in delusions of grandure about his sexuality, and then he insulted everybody's intelligence by claiming that it was material for his standup comedy or some similar lame excuse. Have you read the posts? I'm curious to know what you think of them. To me, what he wrote has got 'sexual psychopath' written all over. I don't know - cannot know - if he is a psychopath for a fact or if he just talks and behaves like one because he had a troubled childhood or some other reason. But I do know that, either way, exposing his behavior may protect people out there - mainly women - from falling for his BS and perhaps being victimized in one way or another. Are you saying that it is best for us to shut up so he can continue doing what he does, at the expense of innocent people, just to respect his "privacy"?
As for his supporters, as Guardian says, if they have done nothing wrong then they have nothing to fear - assuming they are not sock-puppets. Personally, at this point in time I only feel sorry for them. Imagine having the truth staring at your face and still not see it, at your peril.
Guardian
The Cosmic Force
Windmill knight said:
Exactly, and having dealt with MANY on-line male predators in the past, I know that they consistently create female personas to monitor the women they are manipulating. It's very common for a male predator to pretend to be his own wife or girlfriend online....use a proxy, separate accounts, etc. On Facebook, Usenet etc. it's often a "close friend" who's always "there for them"
Sockpuppet relationships often get quite dramatic.
Me too. These women usually join these groups because they've been victimized....and unfortunately most of them still do not have a clue what they're really dealing with. Some are still in shock, some have just started reading about pathology, predation, etc. Some are so damaged they consider the things Sheridan says and does to be "normal" and acceptable. Makes me sad, and angry.
Perceval said:
Seems this fits the classical predator MO as has been brought to light here and elsewhere. Seems also that whether it is a calculated design on sex, control, power, money, et al, "vulnerability" is what is sought after by this type and their lies roll off their tongues like honey with their own believe that it is an enthralling truth for which you must come to believe or else, type of thing.
corvo said:
Yet you have not kept your opinion to yourself here have you? Hmmm.
If you were to write a similar non opinionated post to "this Sheridan" what would you write being the proclaimed neutral that you make yourself out to be?
If you are as interested and concerned as you make yourself out to be and have read what has been discovered about Sheridan , his words , his actions etc ,then I cant see how you could even post here what you have posted.
Sounds like you have some kind of vested interest here. Of course I could be wrong
