Vulgar Comment On Newspaper Site Costs Man His Job

DeeFresh writes "ReadWriteWeb has an article up today discussing an incident in which a school employee lost his job after leaving a comment on the website of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch newspaper. After the school employee responded to the newspaper's poll of 'the strangest thing you've ever eaten' with a feline-inspired vulgarity, Kurt Greenbaum, the site's director of social media, tracked down the commenter's identity through his IP address and reported him to school officials. When confronted, the school employee resigned from his job."

Comments

Pussy. There, I said it.

[GPLDAN]

I say everyone on /. should head over the St. Louis Post Dispatch page and post variations on the word. There must be 100 words in the English language for it, so let's get started....

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[MrNaz]

I agree. This isn't some Orwell-inspired conspiracy to silence freedom of expression, this is a valid objection to the use of equipment in an educational institution being used inappropriately. Yes, censorship and coalescing of power in the hands of the government/corporate complex is a huge problem faced by the general population of western nations, but lets identify the problem rather than burning down the house to kill the termites. I don't agree with the idea that social taboo as a means of behavioral regulation is a bad thing. Telling teachers to behave in a manner that highlights to children how we would like the future generation to conduct themselves is not OMG CENSORSHIP, it's the process by which tribal savages become productive farmers, who become orderly towns people who become civilized nations. Take a walk out to the streets in a large city these days, and the behavior you'll see makes the marauding Vikings look positively gentlemanly.

The outcry about this really highlights in my mind the fact that society today has decided that finding common morality is a bit too hard to bother, and apathetically defaulted to a state of total moral disintegration. It's not censorship to think that civilized people should act, well, civilized. To all of you who think that it's some kind of social repression to frown upon people who make a habbit of unashamedly expressing themselves in a vulgar and crass manner, I suggest you go see the movie Idiocracy, because it's about YOU.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[edmicman]

To all of you who think that it's some kind of social repression to frown upon people who make a habbit of unashamedly expressing themselves in a vulgar and crass manner, I suggest you go see the movie Idiocracy, because it's about YOU.

You talk like a fag, and your shit's all retarded.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[Spazztastic]

Because you are offtopic. Or
The crowd is today in a very humorous mood.

My GP comment was modded +1 funny for some reason. Maybe it was an accidental moderation, but I wasn't going for funny. This'll get modded down as well as your comment. Oh well, I got karma to burn!

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

To all of you who think that it's some kind of social repression to frown upon people who make a habbit of unashamedly expressing themselves in a vulgar and crass manner, I suggest you go see the movie Idiocracy, because it's about YOU.

Bull fucking shit. And I mean that in the nicest possible way.
Vulgarity is just another means of expressing dissatisfaction. An insult written in obscenities is no worse than one written in flowery language, frequently its a lot better because it gets to the point that much quicker.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[bwalling]

It's only vulgar because we have collectively agreed to consider it as vulgar. If we would just get over the idea that certain terms are vulgar, we could move on from having vulgarity and the childish bickering that results from its use in certain environments. "Fuck" is only profane if you keep considering it to be profane.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[AlamedaStone]

I don't agree with the idea that social taboo as a means of behavioral regulation is a bad thing. Telling teachers to behave in a manner that highlights to children how we would like the future generation to conduct themselves is not OMG CENSORSHIP, it's the process by which tribal savages become productive farmers, who become orderly towns people who become civilized nations.

I think the time for the moral majority is dying, and I'm thrilled. Keep your social taboos off my freedom of speech.

I also don't think people should be fired for shooting their mouths off in a venue unrelated to their job. I mean for god's sake, he wasn't even posting under his own name, his IP was traced. Even if it wasn't, why shouldn't teachers be allowed to express themselves? Shouldn't they be encouraging free expression, even if it's vulgar, between the test-prep sessions?

Okay, his post was fairly puerile and probably not the funny response he wanted. What the hell, sometimes you drop a bomb. It doesn't mean you should lose your job.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[johnlcallaway]

People use Fuck because it is vulgar and profane. I use it sparingly because sometimes, a vulgar and profane word fits. We NEED vulgar and profane words to express anger and other intense emotions. There is a significant difference in calling something 'stupdi' and calling something 'FUCKING STUPID!!!'

The newspaper did the right thing. Someone repeatedly posting something after it has been deleted should be addressed. It was vulgar, and a large part of society thinks so. He did not get the poster fired, the poster resigned because he was discovered doing something he knew he shouldn't be doing and thought he couldn't be found out. Tough shit.

I told my son once when he lamented about people treating him based on the way he dresses that he was right, it's not fair. So he can either dress that way to try and change people's perceptions and accept the consequences until they do, or he can dress better. Neither one is the right answer, both influence one's life.

He choose to continue to dress the way he wanted, and decided he didn't care what people thought. The guy posting the vulgarity should have known that it would not be appreciated, and deal with the consequences of getting caught for his actions like an adult.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[hyperquantization]

It's only vulgar because we have collectively agreed to consider it as vulgar.

If the definition of vulgarity relies purely upon a social collective, then it's natural, and reasonable, for violations of such a collective to recursively deteriorate social structure.

"Fuck" is only profane if you keep considering it to be profane.

Is the action defined within a word an action you desire to covertly imbue upon your children? If so, then, by all means, most literally, spread the word. However, I know of few good parents who would approach the subject of sex lightly. Trusting a safe, civilized understanding of the world to surface within a child entirely through the context and connotation of vulgar language, and not overt explanation, is just asking for problems; kids already learn enough through observation to get themselves into trouble all the way through adulthood, why add insult to injury?

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[shentino]

He didn't get fired, he resigned.

He resigned because someone at the paper got nosey and traced him, and when his bosses found out that his hands were in the "using state computer for personal business" cookie jar, he carked and quit.

A few things

1) The newspaper site was entirely within its rights to check its logs and complain to whoever the IP belonged to. In effect, this is no different from tracing an obscene phone call.

2) The teacher was in fact abusing the school's resources by using them for personal reasons.

3) If the school had used monitoring software on its network it could have caught the guy simply VISITING a personal site on the government dime without the paper's help of tattling on him.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[jitterman]

Actually, I agree with MrNaz. And consider this: a person with the intelligence and eloquence to artfully make their point without having to resort to the same bag of 10-15 words the rest of us overuse has proven themselves doubly - they've insulted you AND shown themselves to be more intelligent. Read Cyrano DeBergerac for some good examples of this. If your audience is too dim-witted to understand anything but "asshole" and "dickface" then they're probably not worth the time anyway.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[coinreturn]

You assume two things. First, that the "resignation" was not forced, i.e., "Resign, or you'll be fired." Second, that the school doesn't allow personal use of computers. It may have been his break time for all you know. The company I work for allows "occasional" personal use of company computers (like right now).

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[FatdogHaiku]

While strong language may occasionally be appropriate, I tend to believe the old axiom that:

"Profanity is the last bastion of desperately inarticulate motherfuckers"

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[coinreturn]

School systems do not allow for any personal use.

So glad you're familiar with every school district on the planet.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[be951]

I mostly agree with you, but not this part:

The newspaper did the right thing.

Nope. Wrong. Aside from violating their own privacy policy, he (Greenbaum, the newspaper guy) went counter to the idea of anonymous commenting. If you want to be able to call someone out, don't allow anonymous posting. If an anonymous poster is being a nuisance (and one re-post probably should not qualify -- the poster could have assumed transmission error or some such) block his IP address.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[tomhudson]

For those who haven't figured it out, the summary is wrong. It's not "feline-inspired".

In the comments section of the article, one user posted a single word response referring to a part of a woman's anatomy. Of course, the site's moderators quickly deleted the comment but it soon reappeared - obviously this juvenile was intent on having their say.

A guy's sitting on a plane and - HOLY SMOKE - the POPE is in the next seat!

Not wanting to disturb his Holyness, the guy discretely looks, and sees the pope is engrossed in a crossword puzzle.

A minute later, the pope clears his throat and says "Excuse me, do you know a 4-letter word for a woman that ends in 'u-n-t'"?

The guy turns red, embarrassed. Finally, he realizes - "AUNT"!

The pope thanks him, then says "You wouldn't happen to have an eraser?"

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[BobMcD]

The newspaper did the right thing. Someone repeatedly posting something after it has been deleted should be addressed. It was vulgar, and a large part of society thinks so. He did not get the poster fired, the poster resigned because he was discovered doing something he knew he shouldn't be doing and thought he couldn't be found out. Tough shit.

The newspaper did the wrong thing. They got really close to doing the right thing, but what seems like a vengeance motive pushed them over the edge.

The wrong thing, that they elected to do, was to attach personal consequences to allegedly anonymous speech. If it is anonymous, it is off the record, and should bear no weight in the real world. This concept is similar to that of the informant, the whistle blower, the confidant, etc. In the Slashdot context, we're not usually anonymous, though there is an option for that. I'll come back to this point...

The right thing, or perhaps an opportunity for a right thing done, was to call out the behavior in question without providing the means to attach any punishment to it. Perhaps they could have informed the school that someone violated their rules on multiple occasions and that if the behavior continued they would ban the school's IP from being able to contact the site. There should have been some kind of a track that gets the site the desired effect (the comments stop) without exacting severe negative consequences on the offender. Because again, there was the illusion of an anonymity pact.

As an example of this pact, imagine if Slashdot were to go back to all the comments you have posted AC over the years, match them by IP to your ordinary comments, and 'out' you publicly. Would you not feel betrayed? I certainly would.

By offering the option, you are allowing the free expression that comes along with it. The simple solution is to require users to log in, thereby allowing you the accountability desired without setting up a false covenant.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[shoemilk]

...the time line of events which are: Random guy makes post, Dir of social media takes offense, dir goes hunting for random poster, finds out it's from a school, sends complaint to school, finds out it's a teacher on school property, teacher is forced to resign.

My understanding from the article was that he sent the complaint to the school without knowing who the poster was. It could have been a pupil, for all he knew.

I amended my timeline to reflect that. What do you say should happen if it was a private residence? What do you say should happen if it was an office building? What do you say should happen if it was the White House or outside of the country?

As to your side note, the mental illness comment is there because you think it's okay for someone's life and livelihood be destroyed because of a word.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[Maestro4k]

The newspaper did the right thing. Someone repeatedly posting something after it has been deleted should be addressed.

Twice does not make for "repeatedly". So, twice, at least a few minutes apart. There was apparently no attempt to do it a third time before it was reported. I've seen spambots post stuff more frequently than that. So no, it wasn't the right thing, the reporter at the paper got offended by something someone said (such irony there) twice, reported it and ended up causing someone to lose their job.

And that bit about irony is important there. How often have you been offended by something you read in a newspaper? How often have people complained to papers about being offended by something in them? (This has happened a lot over the years with regards to comic strips. One of the examples I remember is a few papers refused to run one of the Opus strips.) Now how often has a reporter gotten fired and/or resigned because of those complaints? Seems to me this paper has a double standard. If they offend you, well, it's freedom of the press, you should just deal with it. But if someone posts something they find offensive as a comment on an article on their site? By God they'll report you and make you lose your job. Then they'll post about it gloating that they did so.

And besides, it was ONE FREAKING WORD. That's all the person posted. They probably though they were being witty. Hell, how many of us would think of that response when reading the question "What's one of the strangest thing you've ever eaten?" I'm surprised more people didn't think of it and post it. And if the person posting had really wanted to be vulgar they'd have used more than one word.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[cbreaker]

I've worked consulting for at least a dozen school systems. The Internet can be used by pretty much anyone FOR anything. Sure, there's a line - like don't download torrents at school and no watching online pornography in elementary school. But personal use is what most people actually use the Internet for at work - most work stuff is local - local file servers, local intranet, etc, and schools are no different than any business.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[cbreaker]

Wait - what are you trying to prove here?

That some school somewhere has a rule on the books about private use of the Internet? /shock /amazement /awe

Fortunately, school systems can determine their own rules. And they do.

Let's also not forget that lots and lots of companies and institutions have these kinds of rules on the book, completely unenforced.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[shawb]

The website did not violate their own privacy policy or terms of service:

From the Prvacy Policy:

Compliance with Legal Process
We may disclose personal information if we or one of our affiliated companies is required by law to disclose personal information, or if we believe in good faith that such action is necessary to comply with a law or some legal process, to protect or defend our rights and property, to protect against misuse or unauthorized use of our web sites or to protect the personal safety or property of our users or the public.

And from their terms of service

We have the right to disclose any information that we believe necessary to comply with any law, regulation or governmental request or that information that could prevent or assist in the resolution of any criminal, illegal, or inappropriate activity.

While it may be normally debatable what the terms "misuse" "unauthorized use" and "inappropriate activity" entail, the online conduct portion of the terms of service states:

It is a condition of your use that you do not. . . Use the Site to upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available content that is harmful to minors in any way, or that is harassing, harmful, threatening, abusive, vulgar, obscene, defamatory, libelous, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable.

It could even be argued that the deleted posts constitute sexual harassment, imparting a legal or at least tortious duty to prevent the poster from repeating his actions. Probably not an argument that would hold up in court against the paper if someone was suing the paper for sexual harassment due to a reader posting on the site, but one that does bolster the stance that the paper was in the right.

The editor in question may indeed have violated standards of journalistic integrity by forwarding the information to the school administrators, but I can not see any law or contract broken by their actions.

Re:Pussy. There, I said it.

[tsm_sf]

The position is a salary based position so the 'free' work you refer to is more task driven.

Sure, it's just a task that takes all day. If your wife only puts in 8 hours she's obviously not a teacher.

"may not access or download material from the Internet except for legitimate educational reasons" seems to be pretty clear to me.

"Staff may also use school equipment and networks for professional development and personal use which is both reasonable and appropriate to the school environment. This applies whether the equipment is owned or leased either partially or wholly by the school, and used on or off the school site."

Looks like you didn't read your own link.

first Pussy?

[MRe_nl]

And yet Greenbaum seems to show no remorse...
Asshole.

What?

[Thyamine]

How bored was this guy? He worked at a newspaper and decided 'Hey, I don't like that comment, let me track down who it is, where he works, and report him?' What is this, the second grade? There are two real options, delete it as being offensive or leave it. Maybe a third option if it was a threat of some kind, which you could report to authorities. But really?

Re:What?

[alen]

RTFA

he did delete the comment and the guy from the school kept posting the same thing multiple times

Re:What?

[ZekoMal]

According to TFA, it happened...twice.

Re:What?

[clone53421]

Not a stretch, no, but an abuse of power.

It's not a stretch that someone in the law enforcement would randomly want to run a background check on Barak Obama, but don't try it.

Re:What?

[gnieboer]

Most likely, IMHO, after deleting the post a second time, the moderator was in the process of blocking the poster's IP address, and did a routine reverse DNS check to see where the IP was. That check pulled up an extension ".edu".
Then, and only then, his concerned parent mind kicked in, and now armed with the knowledge that there was a person posting vulgarities from a school computer during school hours, and he had make a moral decision whether to ignore it or do something about it. He decided to do something about it once he knew it was coming from a school.

Now can I prove this is how it went down? No, but it sure seems more logical that this guy going on a witchhunt of anyone who says something bad on his boards.

FLIP SIDE: Alternate reality where he decides to do nothing... one week later an individual in a trusted position commits horrible [sexual] crime, and the resulting investigation finds out he posted [sexual] comments to a website, and people with the ability to take action knew about it, but did nothing.

NOW, replace [] with "radical Islamic" and see how it sounds like something recent at Ft. Hood. He was damned either way.

Re:What?

[Rob the Bold]

RTFA

he did delete the comment and the guy from the school kept posting the same thing multiple times

So what? How hard is it to delete it multiple times. That guy could be replaced by a shell script. And anyway, these reader feedback forums on newspapers' websites (and elsewhere) are just an open invitation for every crank, crackpot and wacko in town (and the whole internet) to post whatever vile, stupid, racist, crazy, nonsensical comment they can come up with.

First, we had letters to the editor. You had to take pen or keyboard in hand, crank out a physical copy, mail it in and even then the editors only posted a sampling of the feedback on any given subject. Usually, the editors even tried to get a balanced discussion on controversial topics -- at least in terms of number of letters.

Then we get the phone-in comment line. Any loser with a phone and time to burn could rant to his hearts content. The messages were kept short by the recording time limit, so the paper could print a bunch on the comment page. Uninformed illiterates could finally voice their ill-considered, illogical opinions in a public forum. But at least the finite amount of space on the page and the fact the editors had to choose which ones to print kept things to a dull but stupid roar.

Fast forward to on-line comments. Space is practically unlimited, so the editors no longer even bother to review comments prior to posting. Anything and everything gets put up for all to see until someone comes around to delete the really bad stuff (racism, threats, pointless profanity, rabid non-sequiturs, etc.)

Again, I say, if you create such a forum, you are begging for this kind of thing. Hunting down one guy for double-posting a profanity (and a slightly funny -- but cliched -- on-topic one at that) is really overkill, when there's plenty of really bad stuff to be dealt with. "Pussyman" was clearly singled out for personal reasons on the part of the newspaper employee for special treatment. Poster was a little stupid and childish, but the editor was mean and spiteful.

Re:What?

[clone53421]

No! There is no reason to do a reverse DNS lookup in order to ban a single IP. Ban the IP and be done with it.

If you find yourself banning multiple IPs that appear to come from the same subnet, then it would be justified to do a reverse DNS lookup for the purposes of banning the whole range. Releasing that data would still be an abuse of power, unless you state in your privacy policy that you reserve the right to do so. They didn't.

Just doing the reverse lookup was a minor abuse of power. Releasing the information, IMHO, was most certainly a punishable abuse of power. He should be at least reprimanded on-the-record (just doing the lookup could perhaps be handled with a friendly hey-you're-doing-it-wrong, I'm-not-writing-you-up-for-it-this-time-but-please-don't-do-that-again).

Re:What?

[Monchanger]

I think posting vulgarity on news stories is more a crime of opportunity, which is generally preventable if precautions are taken. I agree that they're certainly not open invitations, but unless you're naive enough to assume bored and stupid people do not exist (and FSM help you if you are), you're a fool to not protect yourself with email validation or a captcha.
Tight jeans are certainly no excuse for the crimes of a rapist, but a woman objectifying herself is the best way of attracting those criminals, just as showing off your wealth or walking alone at night are the best ways of getting mugged. It's not the cause of the crime, but it can determine what makes one person a victim rather than another.

Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scum

[drinkypoo]

Not only that, but he's a fucking hypocrite. He called this guy's employer up with the goal of having him fired, and when cornered over the issue said:

"Yeah, you caught me! I made him log on to his computer at work, visit STLtoday.com's Talk of the Day, read the item, type a vulgarity and hit the "submit" key.

Interesting perspective. Thanks for your contribution.

Oh, I didn't say he was fired. I said he resigned.

"A vulgarity"? You mean the word pussy? OMFG WHAT WOULD JESUS THINK IF HE SAW THAT WORD? Guess what? People have sex.

P.S. Forced to resign is much the same thing as being fired, especially since in this day and age he could probably have been sued for sexual harassment over such a comment, thus completely ending any future employability.

Using the word 'pussy' on school time is simply not that bad. Of course, I can't attach these comments to the article itself, because comments are disabled there now even though the story is only three days old. Perhaps that's because most of the comments go something like this:

YOU are the director of social media? tools to be leveraged to get businesses closer to their customers?

what an awful story and it's even more embarassing that you squawk about it after the fact.

Kurt Greenbaum is scum, and I will do my best to avoid their website in the future.

No place for this kind of crap in America.

[Anonymous Coward]

Kurt Greenbaum should be ashamed. There is no place whatsoever for that kind of behavior in America.

Somebody simply wanted to freely express himself, and Kurt interfered. Absolutely pathetic.

Re:No place for this kind of crap in America.

[clone53421]

Would you allow an anonymous poster to spam the Disney website with vulgarity under the umbrella disguise of free speech?

Fixed that for you. We don't jump to conclusions about people or their motives around here (well, I don't).

Feel free to block the person's IP, but unless illegal activities are suspected, tracking down the culprit is absolutely unjustified.

Pay back

[headhot]

Some one should track every thing Kurt posts and report back to his boss and wife.

Re:Pay back

[csartanis]

Did Kurt Greenbaum rape and murder a young girl in 1990? Heh, just kidding!

Re:Pay back

[AlamedaStone]

That sort of "pay back" would be just as bad as the thing that he did. Better if his employer simply reprimands him for violating the anonymity inherent in the poll he administrated.

Just because he could did not mean he was justified in doing so. The correct action would have been to delete the offensive content, then either (A) remove the anonymity, so that the anonymous user couldn't continue to post or (B) ban that IP for the rest of the poll (or permanently, it's your decision).

Since Kurt evidently violated the site's privacy policy by his actions, and that violation resulted in the wronged party losing his job, it seems to me that Kurt should be out on the street too. A reprimand seems too generous.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

I see a lot of weak people here in the story...

[filesiteguy]

Wow! I'd say that Greenbaum should be reprimanded for not performing his duties. I wonder where - in the St. Louis Dispatch policies - it states for employees to track down the ip address of those making offensive (but not illegal) posts and then contact the work.

OTOH, why the heck did the teacher resign at first being contacted? I wonder how much more there is to the story than we're seeing.

Lesson learned: When making anonymous posts, use either a proxy, an anonymous posting service (COTSE.NET), someone's open WiFi connection, or a friend's computer.

Re:I see a lot of weak people here in the story...

[mcgrew]

Lesson learned: When making anonymous posts, use either a proxy, an anonymous posting service (COTSE.NET), someone's open WiFi connection, or a friend's computer.

He repeatedly reposted the same comment after its being removed, so the lesson is when trolling, use either a proxy, an anonymous posting service , someone's open WiFi connection, or a friend's computer. Actually the lesson is don't be a troll!

What the guy who was forced to resign was doing was, in fact, trolling, by any definition of the word.

Re:I see a lot of weak people here in the story...

[kthejoker]

Umm ... you quote it right there pretty clearly:

"We may disclose personal information ... to protect against misuse ... of our web sites."

So ... what?

He resigned

[Lord Byron II]

It's not fair that they tracked him down, but if he resigned then he gave up without a fight.

Re:He resigned

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Since all our information is 3rd hand, at best, it is rather difficult to say whether he resigned or whether he "resigned".

Some resignations are without incident; but a fair few, particularly in the immediate vicinity of unpleasant happenings, are basically firings by other means. In particular, given that teachers can often be pretty hard to fire because of union issues, it wouldn't wholly surprise me if(either because they are puritans, or because they already wanted to get rid of the guy for other reasons) admin informed him that he could either resign quietly, or resign himself to having the remainder of his tenure be one long march through hell in absolutely every legal way available to them.

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[sopssa]

He didn't know it was an employer but probably thought that maybe some student. Still an asshole and idiotic thing to do tho.

He got it coming

[elnyka]

Not that I agree with the guy losing his job, but he should have known better. Posting vulgarities while on the job and/or using work-related assets (computer, e-mail, internet connectivity), and/or when representing the company, that's a big no no. This is specially true if you work in an educational institute.

Now consider the following (bold text by me):

http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/the-editors-desk/the-editors-desk/2009/11/post-a-vulgar-comment-while-youre-at-work-lose-your-job/all-comments/

By mid-morning, a number of folks had commented about their experiences with Bird’s Nest Soup, octopus, cow brains and rattlesnake. Then, while I was in our 10 a.m. news meeting, someone posted in reply a single word, a vulgar expression for a part of a woman’s anatomy. It was there only a minute before a colleague deleted it.

A few minutes later, the same guy posted the same single-word comment again. I deleted it, but noticed in the WordPress e-mail alert that his comment had come from an IP address at a local school. So I called the school. They were happy to have me forward the e-mail, though I wasn’t sure what they’d be able to do with the meager information it included. About six hours later, I heard from the school’s headmaster. The school’s IT director took a shine to the challenge. Long story short: Using the time-frame of the comments, our website location and the IP addresses in the WordPress e-mail, he tracked it back to a specific computer. The headmaster confronted the employee, who resigned on the spot.

So we have an individual who was using work assets to make not one, but two vulgar posts. It kinda makes you wonder how intent was this guy in checking that web page over and over (like many slashdoters do), re-posting the vulgarity as many times as needed... not the type of activity you are supposed to be doing while on the clock (after all, they give you a paycheck for work, not because you are pretty or something.)

The school was in the right in asking the guy "what are you doing, ON THE CLOCK, with OUR COMPUTER ASSETS, posting the same profanity several times?

It is also worth noting that the school didn't fire him, but that he quit on the spot... or so says the story, but that's irrelevant anyways. The guy had it coming.

Now I can't way to see the juvenile posters making this a case of libertarian freedom of speech vs 1984'esque police control and the war on terror.

Re:He got it coming

[ZekoMal]

Nah; I don't need to sully any of that. He resigned (we obviously do not have all of the information, because I honestly doubt that the conversation went "you said pussy twice!" and the guy went "GAH oh noes I quit! D:") because "concerned citizen" noticed that this was coming from a local school IP address. Now, this could have two variations: if it was an elementary school, it would seem strange. If it was either a middle or high school, well, it could have easily been from any student who felt like trolling.

So, Mr. concerned citizen forwarded a message along the lines of "this e-mail address from your IP address said "pussy" twice on my website". If it had been any student e-mail, that would be the end of it because the teachers just do not have student e-mail addresses on file (usually). If it had been the headmasters e-mail address, Mr. concerned citizen would have been duly ignored.

And then Mr. concerned citizen writes an article celebrating his ability to turn someone in for saying "pussy" twice. It's slightly difficult (and disturbing) to believe that Mr. concerned citizen had the local school IP address memorized to the point where a brief glance at the e-mail alert tipped him off that this was a serious issue.

It will be a delight to see if this becomes a normal thing. You know, adults posting on a not-child oriented website and being punished for using naughty words. I'm sure the teacher wasn't on a lunch break, or wasn't waiting for 1200 copies to print, or wasn't waiting for his students to finish a test, etc. Almost as atrocious as someone replying to slashdot on the clock, with their employers computer assets.

But maybe I just find the idea of being tracked to your job by a hypersensitive journalist a little off putting. Suppose he decides that he should moderate out disagreeable posts? He's well within his rights to do so, as a moderator.

I just find it ridiculous that the adults have greater difficulty coping with foul language than the kids. Seriously, it's a word. Delete it and warn him if you really feel threatened by it; you don't contact the organization it came from. How comical it would have been if he had called them instead..."Hello Mr. Rumples, I have a serious issue to address. You see, someone from within your school said pussy....twice. On the internet."

Re:He got it coming

[intheshelter]

"Now I can't way to see the juvenile posters making this a case of libertarian freedom of speech"

- And who can blame them after your juvenile post blathering about "being on the clock". Jeez, wake up and realize that nitpicking about being on the clock was never the point of this discussion. The point was why the hell was that asshole tracking commenters down? What kind of a dickhead reports someone for posting on the very message board that he left open for comments?

Don't want comments, shut down that functionality. If you do want comments either moderate them or just deal with a few vulgar posts. And whatever you do, don't post the question "what is the grossest thing you've ever eaten" and not be smart enough to see the comments that are coming your way.

While the posts were a bit juvenile and the guy shouldn't have done it during school hours, they aren't noteworthy enough to cost a person his job. The most juvenile act in this story was the vindictive way the guy was hunted down. Sorry, but put it in perspective and realize it's just one little word.

Re:He got it coming

[SleepingWaterBear]

It is also worth noting that the school didn't fire him, but that he quit on the spot... or so says the story, but that's irrelevant anyways. The guy had it coming.

Ok, we're all agreed the guy was an idiot idiot for posting at all. But he 'had it coming?' Really? Suppose instead he'd made two posts to slashdot in that time - a clear misuse of school property - would he deserve to lose his job then? What if he'd posted and reposted a critique on some sort of scientology blog - would he deserve to lose his job then? It seems to me that the reason this guy lost his job is because he violated the ridiculous community morals of a small town, not because of anything to do with misuse of school resources.

At one point in my life I seriously considered becoming a teacher, but I realized that doing so would likely place me at the mercy of the sorts of unthinking bigoted responses we're seeing here. This attitude is at least part of the reason our public education system is failing - the work environment is so unpleasant that (with the exception of a few saints) no one with another option for a career would do it. Would you really want to work beside people who are so shocked by a couple one word internet posts that you can't work with them anymore?

Re:He got it coming

[ChowRiit]

I don't think the main point of the outrage is that he lost his job, but rather that the journalist in question violated his website's own privacy rules and then gloated about getting the guy in trouble. I'd simply expect better from a journalist (although, in retrospect, with people like UK tabloid journalists and Fox News I'm not sure why), and I think that violating someone's privacy and then gloating about it is outrageous.

I do hope they fire this journalist, but I somehow doubt it.

Re:He got it coming

[flyneye]

I suppose I could've modded you overrated,but that wouldn't do much more than fan the flames.
      Let's look at this from another perspective.A Meta perspective.
        Was the man wrong for typing pussy into a WWW forum?
        A. From the standpoint of being an employee, you bet he was wrong.
          B.From a freedom of speech in an open forum that made possible his opinion/joke perspective, no he was alright. Moderation and site administration are the responsibilities of the site owner.
          Now the new question, was the paper wrong for tracking the man down merely to take out their anxiety on, when they enabled him and many others to write whatever they like without scripted moderation?
          A.If he were actually protecting taxpayers,children,business assets he would be right, but this isn't the case. He did it out of anger on newspaper time to grind his own ax and make his moderating job easier by denial of freedom of speech to someone that he didn't know posted from a school. Had it been me from my home and a confrontation from him had ensued, he would be getting his nose reset.
          B. This is just outright being a snitch to aquire feelings of self righteous vengeance. Were I the fired man, I would expend my resources to have the snitch investigated for anything useable to make his life hell. Alert the IRS to possible living beyond his means. Complain to the neighborhood association about any infraction. Complain to the police about any unusual noise or parking violations in front of his house.
        I don't think you can find any case of society accepting a snitch as a welcome factor to any community. In the micro society of prison they are eliminated immediately. In society we end up having to pay for witness relocation. In schools they are the kid taunted mercilessly till graduation and possibly beaten frequently.
        This amounts to the paper baiting the man who would've posted from his home,were that his location at the time. Truthfully I hope he gets a good lawyer and starts working the snitch and the paper over.
          Resignation is often offered to well loved and respected offenders at most jobs for fireable offenses. Since it was a school and a newspaper was involved of course he was offered the choice. DUH.
      Should the man have been smarter? yes
      Should the man have been fired? no
      Should the newspaper be exposed by a meta story? Yes, but that won't happen, Newsclowns won't rat on newsclowns anymore than a cop will out a cop.
        This wasn't news this was revenge and I hope the rat gets his.

 

Re:He got it coming

[Maestro4k]

The most juvenile act in this story was the vindictive way the guy was hunted down.

I agree with you mostly, but I think that's the second most juvenile act in the story. The most juvenile act was posting and gloating about having made someone lose their job over a vulgar word.

Re:TOR

[elnyka]

Time to start using TOR: http://www.torproject.org/.

Here kitty, kitty!

Yeah, it will come handy for e-fooling around while on the clock using work assets <sarcasm>

Your personal freedoms and right to anonymity end when you use equipment that is not your own (but your company) and you are doing it while on the clock for purposes other than those tasked to you while on the clock.

At home (or out of your company's equipment) and while off the clock, certainly, protect your privacy and right of anonymity.

While on the clock and/or using your company's assets, sorry dude, you have no right to that.

"We reserve the right"

[tacarat]

We reserve the right in our sole discretion, but do not assume any obligation, to refuse to post, remove, or edit any messages or postings sent to the Site.

We reserve the right to suspend or terminate your access to and use of this Site if, in our view, your conduct fails to meet any of our guidelines. We also reserve the right to change these terms at any time.

Well, fire Greenbaum. STLtoday.com didn't reserve the right for him to track people down and harass them through their employer, nor did he use the agreed upon remedies outlined in the terms of service. I guess even the editors don't read those things.

Re:"We reserve the right"

[mbone]

...nor did he use the agreed upon remedies outlined in the terms of service. I guess even the editors don't read those things.

Editors : we are altering our Terms of Service.

Pray we do not alter them any further

Re:"We reserve the right"

[Venerable Vegetable]

Also following excerpts are from their privacy policy:

Our web servers automatically collect limited information about your computer's connection to the Internet, including your IP address (but not the e-mail address), when you visit our sites. Your IP address does not contain personally identifiable information, nor does it identify you personally.

We will not share individual user information with third parties unless the user has specifically approved the release of that information. In some cases, however, we may provide information to legal officials as described in “Compliance with Legal Process” below.

He got it coming

[Hognoxious]

He got it coming

Isn't that the point? Huh huh. Heh heh.

Anyway, how do we know it was a vulgarity? He could have visited Vietnam. Or Korea. Something like that.

Eating a pussy is cool, but eating pussy is not?

[RiotingPacifist]

Still on the site is the story of how some guy killed and ate a cat (is that even legal?), but that is ofc fine, however the guy posting an innuendo obviously went too far!

Naughty words, or not.

[AliasMarlowe]

I have eaten many different animals (or at least parts of them), including rattlesnake, crocodile, alligator, iguana, turtle, and many different molluscs, arthropods, echinoids, and whatnot from sea or river. I have also eaten squirrel, bear, dog, and cat.
So, I can say I have eaten pussy, and you can interpret or misinterpret it any way you want. Oh, and woof-woof, too.

Re:Naughty words, or not.

[ArsenneLupin]

I have eaten many different animals (or at least parts of them), including rattlesnake, crocodile, alligator, iguana, turtle, and many different molluscs, arthropods, echinoids, and whatnot from sea or river. I have also eaten squirrel, bear, dog, and cat. So, I can say I have eaten pussy, and you can interpret or misinterpret it any way you want. Oh, and woof-woof, too.

Yeah, I like Chinese food too.

Would this journalist protect his sources?

[carou]

Clearly, the standards of journalistic integrity are going down.

Re:Would this journalist protect his sources?

[Anonymous Coward]

I see what you did there, you cunning linguist.

Re:Would this journalist protect his sources?

[need4mospd]

Yes, they're quite clearly still thinking inside the box.

Re:TOR

[Spazztastic]

People do have breaks, and thus, what they do on their time is their business, no matter who owns the equipment.

Wrong.

I work for a school district in the Technology department and everything that you do on our laptops, in or out of the district, you can be held liable for. It does matter who owns the equipment because if you cause damage to a network using a laptop that belongs to us, we can be liable. Using your analogy I could plug in my thumb drive and watch Debbie Does Dallas on my lunch break on my laptop that belongs to the district, which would be a violation of the agreement I and everybody else signed when they received network credentials.

Many school districts also have you sign a bunch of legal forms claiming that you can be held liable for actions you perform outside of work and after hours. Get a DUI? You have to report it. Where I work, if you get a speeding ticket you have to report it to your manager. I agree, though, that's bullshit.

So Freaking What!

[realsilly]

I'm so sick to death on hearing/reading/learning of people who post something on the internet and lose their job over it. Regardless of whether the post was fictional or real, the man was not posting anything about the school he worked for. He kept the language to not use profanity, and whether someone reads it as 'pussy' or 'cat' doesn't freaking matter. There is no excuse for our society today for making people lose their jobs because of their personal life. A job is what the average person works for 8 hours a day usually away from home.

I don't have to read the comments. The guy posted with an anonymous name. I call Shenanigans.

Conversely, here is my message to the world. If you're going to post on the web with all the knowledge we have today about how it is used against us, then you subject yourself to scrutiny, right or wrong, you do.

Re:Might sound harsh

[malkavian]

The problem with working in education is that your right to free speech is almost non-existant.
Say something that some jumped up "think of the children" zealot doesn't like, and you end up having your right to be in the presence of "impressionable children" questioned. While they're questioning, you frequently end up not being allowed to do your job "just in case".
With the option of quietly quitting, having all the hassle, but being able to get a place elsewhere, or having your name plastered across the media (news outlets just LOVE to play with this kind of story) and never being able to work in the profession again, you know what's on the cards as soon as this comes up. It's a hard and gruelling task, to go through those inquisitions.

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[Bakkster]

He didn't know it was an employer but probably thought that maybe some student. Still an asshole and idiotic thing to do tho.

Anonymous trolling is "an asshole and idiotic thing to do". Embarrasing someone for trolling might be as well, but at that point it's just eye-for-an-eye.

Or the school did.

[Alpha Soixante-Neuf]

The school’s IT director took a shine to the challenge. Long story short: Using the time-frame of the comments, our website location and the IP addresses in the WordPress e-mail, he tracked it back to a specific computer. The headmaster confronted the employee, who resigned on the spot.

Why do people assume the teacher quit because he thought he'd get fired? If I had a boss come to me at the end of the day and say the IT department has spent all day stalking someone who anonymously used the word "p*ssy" as a joke about eating and now it's been discovered that I am the culprit with any kind of incriminating tone I would quit too.

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[xtracto]

Excuse my ignorance but, isn't a pussy a small cute hairy mammal?

Mod parent up for common sense.

[Pollux]

The issue to debate here is not whether someone should lose their job over posting a vulgarity on the internet.

The issue to debate here is whether someone should lose their job over posting a vulgarity on the internet while at work.

And if anyone would RTFA, they would have noticed that he made the post twice. The first time, they just deleted it w/o a second thought, but he reposted it. Again, he did it while at work.

And, does anyone know what else was he doing on company time?

Re:Puritannical?

[TheKidWho]

He only posted the comment twice... Have you ever posted a comment and not seen it appear, only to think that the request never went through and subsequently reposted the comment?

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[Fred_A]

>"A vulgarity"? You mean the word pussy? OMFG WHAT WOULD JESUS THINK IF HE SAW THAT WORD? Guess what? People have sex.

Not in the US they don't. Decent people have their babies delivered by Fedex. Only European heathens have sex.

Pervert.

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[AnotherUsername]

What Greenbaum did was against the privacy policy of the site:

We will not share individual user information with third parties unless the user has specifically approved the release of that information.

"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[RobotRunAmok]

In America at least, you cannot be arrested for saying something stupid or even treasonous on the Internet. But that's it. That is the sum total of your protection. You can't be arrested, that's all there is to it. You CAN lose your job, lose any prospect for meaningful employment, lose your wife, lose the respect of your family, friends, and co-workers.

Never write anything anywhere on the Internet, "anonymously" or not, that you would not want your wife, boss, friends, or children to read. Period. It's not difficult to understand, yet we continually find ourselves trying to defend these losers as if they are some kind of free speech champions. They're not martyrs, they're morons. Giving these guys an Anonymous Login is like giving them a bottle of Tequila. Sure, it's their right, but you hope they have enough self-awareness to know how stupid and ugly they appear after they indulge.

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[omnichad]

All the same, it's kind of rough when you whine to someone's employer. When I moved into a new town, I tried to rent a video at a rental store. Their policy was strict - I had to show them a utility or other bill to prove I lived there. I had just moved! I got a little angry and asked what they expect me to do. They asked where I worked, and I named my employer. I didn't get a video that night, but they called my boss and complained about me.

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[commodore64_love]

Okay first off "pussy" is a word. Nothing more. No more offensive than saying "vagina" or "penis". Stop being so sensitive Americans.

Second in a truly FREE country you should be able to do whatever you want *outside of work*, and not be fired for it. Just last week we read a story about a guy who was fired *on mere suspicion* of downloading child porn (and later proved to be innocent). That's just not right. Companies should not be able to fire people for non-work-related things.

I'd sue this school for unjustified dismissal. Even if I eventually lose the case, it's worthwhile purely as a form of revenge (wasting the time of the principal and hopefully scaring him). I learned that tactic from RIAA. Also last week's Medium episode.

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[syrinx]

Actually a "truly free country" has freedom of association, which implies freedom of lack of association. If a company doesn't want to be associated with you, they can fire you, for any reason whatsoever. And if you don't want to be associated with the company, you can quit, too.

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides I don't buy into the whole "corporations are people" argument. Corporations no more have human rights than does a tree or rock, and therefore wouldn't have the Right of Association. The individuals inside the corporation would retain that right (and can quit if they don't like me), but the corporation itself has no such right.

Well the good news is that you're are totally right. Corporations aren't people. Nor are they rocks or trees. And even more good news is that a corporation will never ever fire you. It will always be a person who fires you. What's interesting about your post is that you seem to think the default is that you have a right to be employed at any business you want to be employed at and anyone who doesn't like it can quit. I assume that includes the founders and owners? Can you please explain where the hell you got this sense of entitlement?

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[archangel9]

Pussy.

I'm too scared to type that word whilst at work, so I simply quoted yours.

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[KnownIssues]

This is why I love Slashdot (I'm still too noob to call it /.)--I was all set to make my post in defense of the fired employee, but after reading the cogent arguments of the "5, Insightfuls", I've actually changed my opinion. It would be different if the employee had been fired because of an anonymous post made during personal time on personal equipment. But you don't have the same rights when using business equipment while on the job.

On the other hand, I'm still disturbed that the site owner didn't respect his own claim to comments being anonymous. I certainly have no right to expect anonymity. I would certainly be unwise to believe I have anonymity just because a site claims I do. But if a site owner claims you can make anonymous comments and then breaks that "agreement", I think it should discredit him. He's lost his site's users' trust at that point.

Re:"Freedom of Speech" on the Internet

[Seraphim_72]

Actually a "truly free country"

...doesn't give personhood or its rights to corporations.

Re:Puritannical?

[digitalchinky]

I guess reading comprehension is troublesome for some.

He wrote Pussy once. Kurt deleted it. Exactly once more he wrote the word Pussy. Then Mr The Kurt decided on revenge.

Crapflood = a metric fuck ton of the annoying shit, not the word pussy posted exactly twice.

And given the question, any sane admin would have giggled like a school girl for a couple of milliseconds and then quietly deleted it. A half decent admin would tweak a couple of lines of code in the back end - a half a minute job - to prevent such words from being posted again.

Re:Puritannical?

[Anonymous Coward]

No (trying again, the first submission didn't seem to work)

Re:Mod parent up and GP down

[Anonymous Coward]

And make me a sandwich, bitch. Seriously, what the fuck is the point of stupid comments like "mod that guy up and that guy down"? First, do you think you have enough clout for the mods to do whatever the fuck you say? Second, it adds nothing of value to the conversation, only the fact that you're a dick, which we probably could have figured out on our own. If I had mod points I'd mod you down just for being a dumbass.

Re:Blame not Kurt, but the schools headmaster?

[SilasMortimer]

I agree with you. Well, I suppose it depends on intent. People in previous posts have used the phrase "track him down", as if it takes a lot of effort. Really? And is it really uncommon for an annoyed admin to take a quick look just to see "where the hell is this guy from?" And if he looked at it to see if someone was posting inappropriately, so what? If this teacher had worked in a store or a restaurant, I was a delivery driver delivering to that business, and he was a jackass and it bothered me, is it inappropriate for me to complain to the manager? If he was outside by the dumpster, having a smoke, and he started making lewd comments toward a woman walking by and for some reason I didn't knock his block off for it, would it be inappropriate to walk inside and ask to speak to the manager? What makes this any different? Maybe someone has a good answer for that last question. I'm a little torn about it, myself. I just think that all this backlash against Greenbaum is reactionary. This sort of behavior from a school or government employee while on the job and using work computers is something worth complaining about. And if you see that this is coming from a school, are you going to automatically assume it's the staff? Frankly, I'd find it much more likely and safe to assume that it's some smartass student. And if so, informing the school makes a lot more sense, right? As far as banning the IP - do you really want to deny access to an entire school for the actions of one individual? If you did, what would happen? Likely, someone would eventually notice, inform the administrator or whatever techie the school has (I would hope they'd have one) and the techie would contact the website, asking why they were banned. I might be wrong on this, but I think the website maintainers would be assholes if they refused to say and nattered on about "protecting the rights of the poster." And I don't see any rights violated. Am I wrong? What rights you have at any given website is entirely up to the website unless it's illegal, and controlling content on your site is not illegal.

Really not paying attention to his readers

[Bazzargh]

Greenbaum is the social media editor at the newspaper. A while back he posted the results of a survey which showed that:
61% of his readers did not want the editors deciding what comments were offensive

Given his response to the comments on the article, I don't think he's any closer to understanding what he was told the first time.

Re:Tor in browsers

[Spad]

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2275

It's a newspaper, damn it.

[argent]

It doesn't matter whether he "had it coming" or not.

Contacting the school violated the stated privacy policy of the site, whether it was a student or staff. We're talking about a newspaper, for god's sake. A newspaper should be the first to stand behind their privacy policy. Reporters have gone to jail to maintain the privacy of their sources, and while the online equivalent of "letters to the editor" isn't quite in the same league as "Deep Throat", this was still unacceptable behavior.

The St Louis Post-Dispatch needs to step up to the plate and bat for their own goddamn rights. If they DON'T do something about this violation of privacy, they weaken their own ability to protect their sources.

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[mr_stinky_britches]

Wow, that is surprising. What an unethical action to take on Greenbaum's part. Is there somewhere we can report this?

Re:Surely informing the school runs against

[kthejoker]

On the very same page!

We may disclose personal information if we or one of our affiliated companies is required by law to disclose personal information, or if we believe in good faith that such action is necessary to comply with a law or some legal process, to protect or defend our rights and property, to protect against misuse or unauthorized use of our web sites or to protect the personal safety or property of our users or the public.

This is NOT about vulgarity

[webdog314]

I am amazed at the responses here on /. This is completely not about this moron's use of vulgarity. Of course he's an idiot, that's a given. More important is the fact that a paper gave what was supposed to be an anonymous poll with an obviously baiting question, and then used that information to track this guy down and ruin his life. In this case it was about some obscenities, but what's to say this couldn't have been about say, late-term abortion, or gay rights? Would you want someone tracking you down and exposing you over that information? Those topics are AT LEAST as enraging today as a couple of obscenities. The school employee was an idiot, but the guy at the newspaper is the one who should be arrested.

I am reluctant to comment

[Microsift]

The man at the newspaper who tracked the ip address, and identified the poster, should be fired. A newspaper should not be in the business of discouraging free speech. If the comment was offensive, it should have been moderated before publication (assuming there's a published policy against posting offensive material).

I am just guessing at what the man said, but unless it referenced some criminal act, tracking him down and getting him fired is inexcusable. The newspaper should issue an apology, and give him a job with an equivalent salary and benefits for life.

 

You're Right. It's About Manning Up

[RobotRunAmok]

In this case it was about some obscenities, but what's to say this couldn't have been about say, late-term abortion, or gay rights?

If you're not prepared to be called out by your boss/wife/kids for the controversial opinions you find yourself venting "anonymously" on the Internet, don't vent on the net. Save it for the local pub, or the diary you keep under your pillow. If everybody put their money and their reputation where there mouths were, civilization might just lurch forward a little bit.

Re:Mod parent up and GP down

[ZekoMal]

Just as useful to the topic as "first post" or people posting anonymously to yell at people for doing whatever they are sick and tired of, I'd imagine. It's more along the lines of "I used up my mod points but want to try and draw attention to the post that I saw to be good-moddable/bad-moddable". But uh, yeah, dick and fuck and bitch and all that too.

Re:Kurt Greenbaum, you are stupid, puritanical scu

[kmcarr]

The paper did not release any information to a third party. The contacted the registered owner of the IP address which sent the message. Most definitely a "first party".

It's A Hoax, People!

[tomhudson]

Details of the story don't make sense. How would he know the IP address belonged to the school? And worse:

A few minutes later, the same guy posted the same single-word comment again. I deleted it, but noticed in the WordPress e-mail alert that his comment had come from an IP address at a local school. So I called the school. They were happy to have me forward the e-mail, though I wasn't sure what they'd be able to do with the meager information it included.

About six hours later, I heard from the school's headmaster. The school's IT director took a shine to the challenge. Long story short: Using the time-frame of the comments, our website location and the IP addresses in the WordPress e-mail, he tracked it back to a specific computer. The headmaster confronted the employee, who resigned on the spot.

The story is a hoax. Especially since if it were true, the guy who quit could sue the ass off the newspaper for violating their privacy policy. He had, according to their privacy policy, a belief that he could post w/o what supposedly happened, happening.

So, either a hoax, or someone's lying about something ... like maybe spyware on the computer that made the post, and the school trying to cover up.

Re:You're Right. It's About Manning Up

[Maestro4k]

If everybody put their money and their reputation where there mouths were, civilization might just lurch forward a little bit.

And where does a newspaper gloating about making someone lose their job for posting a single vulgar word twice on their site fall in there? I expect papers to have more ethics than that in a civilized society, so I think they've set civilization back a bit with this, not forward.

Re:It's about open discourse

[Caue]

the employer has the right to employ whoever he wants. that's bs. the worker can still post whatever crap he wants, but unemployed. there you go, his rights are well preserved, the employer's rights are preserved as well. I won't hire a nazi-white-supremacy freak, but he still has the right to believe his shit. that's his right and MY right. sod off.

MOD PARENT DOWN

[LanMan04]

:)

Bullshit

[RichiH]

Actually a "truly free country" is an anarchy.

You need rules in human interaction and a combination of a few pretty important of said rules is "you do not hunt down and stigmatize someone for making a sexual joke".

I do congratulate you on your subtle twisting of words, though.