http://forums.contractoruk.com/1053684-post2088.html
Still accusing me of shopping him and has now decided not to post here any more. Very sad that he did not have the backbone to apologise and admit he was wrong.
I have the PM I sent Brillo and the other users and it does suggest that they contact the police to prevent them gaining a court order to get details. It suggests that if they call the officer then the chances are that a phone call would suffice. If they did not make contact then the chances were that we would have to hand over email and IP information and as a lot of posting was likely to have been from a place of work then they would have had a visit at client co.
I also have a couple of replies from Brillo at the time to thank me for how it was handled. Brillo has posted that he wishes me to publish the PMs but I don't see what that will achieve so unless any of you want proof then I will not publish them, if you do want proof PM me and I will be happy to forward details to you.
I struggle to think how I could have handled this any differently, in a that would have protected the end users from unwelcome police attention and also protected the forum. If we had refused the detective's requests I am certain a court order would have been granted. If we refused still then our server hosts would have been approached, the server taken offline and the "evidence" would have been removed.
As Brillo said though, do be careful what you post on here - or any forum, message board or web server anywhere for that matter. Especially if you comments comprise threats to maim, kill or harm a member of HMRC.
I think this shows that Brillo had other petty issues with the forum and was trying to push his own agenda with the BN66 private forum to somehow punish CUK.
Thanks for backing up what I was saying Nick, much appreciated. Thanks also Cojak, this is just a forum ffs!
As Brillo is not able to apologise then I am happy to reciprocate his leaving with a ban. I have not banned him for raising this subject or disagreeing with me but for the inability to apologise and retract his statement that CUK are happy to "shop" end users.
I am very sad about the whole situation.
If anyone thinks I have acted out of line in any way or has any constructive feedback for me or the rest of the CUK team regarding this then let us know.
Still accusing me of shopping him and has now decided not to post here any more. Very sad that he did not have the backbone to apologise and admit he was wrong.
I have the PM I sent Brillo and the other users and it does suggest that they contact the police to prevent them gaining a court order to get details. It suggests that if they call the officer then the chances are that a phone call would suffice. If they did not make contact then the chances were that we would have to hand over email and IP information and as a lot of posting was likely to have been from a place of work then they would have had a visit at client co.
I also have a couple of replies from Brillo at the time to thank me for how it was handled. Brillo has posted that he wishes me to publish the PMs but I don't see what that will achieve so unless any of you want proof then I will not publish them, if you do want proof PM me and I will be happy to forward details to you.
I struggle to think how I could have handled this any differently, in a that would have protected the end users from unwelcome police attention and also protected the forum. If we had refused the detective's requests I am certain a court order would have been granted. If we refused still then our server hosts would have been approached, the server taken offline and the "evidence" would have been removed.
As Brillo said though, do be careful what you post on here - or any forum, message board or web server anywhere for that matter. Especially if you comments comprise threats to maim, kill or harm a member of HMRC.
I think this shows that Brillo had other petty issues with the forum and was trying to push his own agenda with the BN66 private forum to somehow punish CUK.
Thanks for backing up what I was saying Nick, much appreciated. Thanks also Cojak, this is just a forum ffs!
As Brillo is not able to apologise then I am happy to reciprocate his leaving with a ban. I have not banned him for raising this subject or disagreeing with me but for the inability to apologise and retract his statement that CUK are happy to "shop" end users.
I am very sad about the whole situation.
If anyone thinks I have acted out of line in any way or has any constructive feedback for me or the rest of the CUK team regarding this then let us know.
Comment