Has Anyone Been "Outed" and Got in Trouble Over Comments Made in Their Posts?

[Caster]

Hi Ho

I just looked back over some of my posts and worry that they could reflect badly on my company if taken out of this context.

I also think I could be easily identified from my profile and avatar.

I'm thinking of either toning down or going more stealthy in my profile.

As a quality geek I spend all my time on the 5% wrong and forget we have 95% right here. Our last audit showed this, we are getting a lot better. Unfortunately I only post about problems - so it looks negative.

Has anyone ever been called on the carpet for their posts?

[Wes Bucey]

The short answer is yes.

The long answer is: no place in the internet is safe from prying eyes. If you write it, you can be sure someone will read it. If that person is agitated or motivated enough, it is do-able (not easy, but do-able) to ferret out the author, despite fancy screen names, etc. and retaliate.

There are some of us here in the Cove who have paid a penalty for being frank and honest and either "naming names" or leaving enough clues to identify the miscreants of whom we write.

Worse, some of us have paid an "invisible penalty" by losing opportunities and not knowing why. Most folks who torpedo you in retaliation are cowards, themselves, so they try to wreak their damage without leaving themselves open to countermeasures. Oftentimes, it's a subtle word or dig in the right place - "You're thinking of hiring John Doe as a consultant? I've heard some things that just don't seem right. Better safe than sorry. Perhaps you ought to look at someone else."

If you have any posts you'd like to "revise" - write directly to one of the Administrators (Marc, Atul, Howard, or Claes) who can help you deal with the situation.

[Marc]

The only person I know of that 'for sure' got in trouble for posting in this forum was the ASQ person that Chris Paris of Oxebridge 'outted' in the ASQ forums.

However, it is a good idea to take into consideration what Wes says above especially if you post things you think 'might be taken the wrong way' by someone. On the other hand, some people are more paranoid than others.

If someone is worried, change your profile info and I can even change your user name. I've had a few people ask over the years. It's easy for me to do. Or, as Wes says, posts can be changed for up to about a week. After that editing is 'locked out'. The reason is there was a visitor who wiped out more than a year of posts - including attachments - and it took me a couple of days to get them all back. I didn't think it was quite 'fair' as he had downloaded many files from here and part of the idea is to share - including ideas. BUT - If someone does want a post edited, just let me know and I can make the change for you or I can open up editing for that person for a day.

Since the site hides all actual e-mail addresses (unless you put yours in a post, of course), there's no way for anyone to use that to identify you here.

Personally, if I wouldn't say it in public, I sure wouldn't post it on an open forum.

[WALLACE]

I'll come out of my lurking position at this time (Against docs orders) to give my two cents worth.
I was severely reprimanded and given an ultimatum to cease and desist from making comments relating to a certain one of the so called big three or, I would unceremoniously demoted, thrown back into production and/or fired. The former was my final destination.
I'm a lot more happier now and the stress levels are almost non existent.
The Cove can and does give an authority to many comments, thesis, theories and actualities. It's a great voice to process management professionals yet, it can be the nail in your proverbial career coffin. I have been proud to be a part of this voice, regardless of the personal and career outcomes.
Wallace.

[Wes Bucey]

Sorry to learn this, Wallace.

Other folks might get some valuable pointers from the ethics thread I started in terms of protecting yourself when a situation just seems to "beg" for exposure.

Ethics - moral law versus criminal law

Essentially, the point is this: you and your family should be paramount in your concern BEFORE you commit yourself to a course of action which can endanger them.

One thing everyone should avoid is trying to "impress" us here in the Cove or anyone in any other public Forum by sharing gossip which can be traced back to you to your detriment. Many organizations have people on the payroll who are more serious than a heart attack. I certainly had them when I was in the investment banking business (attorneys, private detectives, security experts, etc.) When the powers that be turn these attack dogs loose, it's no face off with a bully in a bar, it's a gang attack in the alley. I swear to you there are better and more effective ways to report on wrong doing than to spout off in a public Forum, thinking you are safe from detection. If you do so from a company computer, it's just plain suicide.

About 50 per cent of the time when folks ask my PRIVATE advice on a course of action, I send them off to a list of attorneys to interview to get counsel to protect themselves. The other 50 per cent of the time, I can see a combination of misunderstandings of the part of the "suspect" AND the "Reporter" and often can suggest a face-saving solution for everyone involved, sometimes even offering to act as the "honest broker" to arbitrate a situation.

Every case is NOT criminal, but even the ones that are just foolish carry a risk for the employee who may be dismissed by an employer who doesn't want reminders around of when he made a foolish error. The avowed reason may be different, but rest assured, it is retaliation nonetheless.

As the sergeant used to say after roll call on Hill Street Blues - "Hey! Be careful out there."

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Originally Posted by Marc

Personally, if I wouldn't say it in public, I sure wouldn't post it on an open forum.

Yes, that is a very good rule, and one I try to stick to as well.

/Claes

[Marc]

My 'problem' is I'll say just about anything in public....

I'm sorry to hear about your experience, Wallace.

The only 'problem' I have had has been with Ford - one company that has a serious problem with this forum and has for a number of years. Once one of the higher ups even called a client of mine and told them to fire me as their consultant because of things I've said here. The Ford person did as one would expect and made veiled threats of pulling business from my client. My client read when I wrote and knew the situation and was very blunt to the Ford person - What I said was nothing less than the truth and he knew it. My client at the time told them no, that they would not fire me. Firing someone for giving an opinion about an actual event is nothing but spite.

In my case I didn't think of it as being 'outed', but was, in fact, no less than I expected considering a history of even working with Ford going back to the late 1980's in helping them solve internal problems. Ford cannot take any criticism without the need to lash out at any who dare criticise them. I have experienced Ford on the inside and out and my experiences were always 'difficult' to say the least.

But this is one of the things I dislike about some companies. Instead of addressing criticism, they attack those who criticise. Instead of concern for customers / suppliers and trying to address problems, they try to shoot the messenger. With an attitude like that, it is part of the reason the problems are deep and seldom solved.

[Marc]

This isn't exactly related, but it does speak volumes about how different sites approach the internet. As most of you know, the Cove has been one of the most open and honest forums on the internet related to quality and associated topics. And I've always tried to protect members - the example of not allowing user e-mail addresses to be public is one, hiding IPs is another example. If there is one thing I do hope is that this thread doesn't inhibit people from posting. If it ever reaches the point where fear controls what is posted for fear of retribution, then a big purpose of the forum will cease to exist. I know a lot of people won't mention, much less publically criticise, their registrar because they fear retribution - a sad state to be in.

http://news.com.com/MSN+bloggers+try...3-5477090.html
MSN bloggers try to foul up censorship tool
Published: December 3, 2004, 5:09 PM PST
By Graeme Wearden
Special to CNET News.com

MSN Spaces, Microsoft's new blogging service, has sparked a new game for some of its users: trying to circumvent its censorship controls.

BoingBoing, a popular Web log, on Friday reported that MSN Spaces is rejecting certain blog titles or URLs because they contain words that Microsoft has deemed inappropriate.

However, like so many censorship tools, Microsoft's is proving less than perfect.

BoingBoing found that all of the most obvious profanities fell foul of Microsoft's electronic sentries.

But the fun started for many users when blogs with tricky titles that resembled innocuous terms--think of a racier version of "tit for tat," for example--cleared Microsoft's censorship filters.

Getting a blog with a dirty name past the MSN Spaces controls may be fun, but it also illustrates the tensions between the traditionally free and open world of blogging and the more corporate approach of a software giant like Microsoft.

"If you can't speak freely on a blog, what's the point of having one?" BoingBoing pointed out.

These tensions are also apparent in Microsoft's approach to blog content. Unlike rival services such as Blogger, MSN Spaces forces new users to grant Microsoft permission to "use, copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, modify, translate and reformat" their blog postings.

Graeme Wearden of ZDNet UK reported from London.